OT: Bible Discussion (Split from Real World Sensitivities)

[SlipperyJim]

Originally Posted by Tifone

I really don't see the link between animal liberation and hatred/violence ^_^ Quite the opposite btw. And about secularists being much more easily offended than many religious people, I think you're totally wrong - both historically and in current society. But I think we're going faaaar off topic.

All across America, Christianity is being challenged in the courts on a daily basis. Michael Newdow and his quixotic challenges against the Pledge of Allegiance come to mind. (And the Pledge isn't even specifically Christian, just generally theist.) Secularists sue to prevent schoolkids from praying. Teachers confiscate Bibles. Religious monuments are constantly under legal threat.

The town of Las Cruces, NM (Spanish for "The Crosses") was sued because the town logo has three crosses on it. Thankfully, the lawsuit has been dismissed, although the plaintiffs may attempt to appeal to the Supreme Court:
http://www.lcsun-news.com/ci_10480497

Despite our whining, American Christians actually have it easy. We just have to put up with lawsuits and social pressure. Christians in other countries are literally in danger of being killed for their faith. See The Voice of the Martyrs for more details about anti-Christian persecution around the globe.

Historically, religious believers have done most of the persecuting. That's shameful, but also true. However, secularists have turned the tables these days, and faith is in the crosshairs.

Originally Posted by Tifone

Before starting to answer, I would like to say that I'm agnostic and I respect everyone's belief until it becomes dangerous for my, or other's people, freedom and happiness and life. So I got no prejudice at all against any religion, I've got many friends having lots of different beliefs/disbeliefs so I'm not attacking your point from an hate-mongering point of view. Actually, I'm not attacking you at all, just reading an historical book for me, an Holy Book for you.

Sure, understood. I don't think you hate me. (You don't even know me!) It's much more likely that you misunderstand the message of Christ. So let's talk about it.

Originally Posted by Tifone

Said that, I ask you to just read, just for the love of talking, debating and learning from each other:

Jesus says (and I'm just quoting):

"If anyone comes to me and does not HATE his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—HE CANNOT BE MY DISCIPLE." [Luke, 14:26]

When interpreting Scripture, context is key. In Luke 14, Jesus was telling His followers about the cost of being a disciple. He wanted to make it very clear to them that His demands were absolute. There should be no possibility of divided loyalties, because Jesus must be the Lord of your life. Reading the whole chapter makes this point quite clear.

Basically, Christ's message here is not that we have to literally hate our families. Rather, His message is that we must love Him so much that we are willing to sacrifice anything (or anyone) for Him.

It's also instructive to note that the overall message of the Bible is extremely pro-family. Parents are told to love our children. Children are told to love and obey their parents. Husbands and wives are instructed to love each other so completely that they become "one flesh" [Genesis 2:24]. One of the last acts Jesus performed before He died on the Cross was to make sure that His mother would have someone to care for her [John 19:25-27]. When taken in context, the idea that Jesus wants us to hate our families is plainly false.

Originally Posted by Tifone

"I tell you that to EVERYONE WHO HAS, MORE WILL BE GIVEN, but as for THE ONE WHO HAS NOTHING, EVEN WHAT HE HAS WILL BE TAKEN AWAY. But those enemies of mine who DID NOT WANT ME TO BE KING OVER THEM - BRING THEM HERE AND KILL THEM IN FRONT OF ME." [Luke 19:26-27]

This quote is taken out of context. Jesus was telling a parable in Luke 19, the Parable of the Ten Minas. Those words you quoted are spoken by Jesus, but they're actually the words of the king in the parable.

Originally Posted by Tifone

"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I DID NOT COME TO BRING PEACE, BUT A SWORD. FOR I HAVE COME TO TURN A MAN AGAINS HIS FATHER, A DAUGHTER AGAINST HER MOTHER, A DAUGHTER IN LAW AGAINST HER MOTHER IN LAW, A MAN'S ENEMIES will be THE MEMBERS OF HIS OWN HOUSEHOLD." [Matthew 10:34-36]

This of course, not to go into the Old Testament, as you were talking just about Jesus.

As with the quote from Luke 14, Jesus is trying to warn His followers about the high cost of following Him. The Gospel divides people based on belief. Those who believe Jesus are fundamentally different from those who do not believe. Our priorities are different. Our worldview is different. Our lives are different. When Jesus is Lord, everything changes.

I have experienced the truth of Jesus's warning in my own life. My parents and I are divided on the Gospel. We maintain a cordial relationship as best we can, but our efforts aren't always successful. You might as well ask a Windows user and a Linux fan to share the same PC.

By the way, please don't make the mistake of thinking that Christians ignore the Old Testament. Ignoring the Old Testament is just modern-day Marcionism. The introduction to John's Gospel makes it crystal-clear: Jesus is the Word of God. Therefore, we have to take the whole Word if we accept Jesus as Lord. Ignoring the Hebrew Scriptures won't do.

That said, it is also important to understand that Christians interpret the Old Testament in the light of Jesus. He is the "lens" through which we read the Hebrew Scriptures. Jesus is the culmination of the Jewish rituals of sacrifice, the perfect High Priest, and the fulfillment of the Mosaic law. So we don't ignore the Hebrew Scriptures, but we do understand them in a very different way from most Jews.

Shalom.

[JaghataiKhan]

By the way, please don't make the mistake of thinking that Christians ignore the Old Testament. Ignoring the Old Testament is just modern-day Marcionism. The introduction to John's Gospel makes it crystal-clear: Jesus is the Word of God. Therefore, we have to take the whole Word if we accept Jesus as Lord. Ignoring the Hebrew Scriptures won't do.

Ok. Care to read the comic ink I gave you then? Old Testament god is f***ing scary.

[SlipperyJim]

Originally Posted by JaghataiKhan

Ok. Care to read the comic ink I gave you then? Old Testament god is f***ing scary.

I'm happy to answer questions about my faith, but I'm not going to read comics by some organization called the Luciferian Liberation Front. Life is too short to spend on such pastimes....

That said, if you have a serious question, I'll do my best to answer it. In answer to your claim that "Old Testament god is f***ing scary," I can only respond that you have underestimated the situation. God can be very scary, even in the New Testament. Read some apocalyptic prophecies....

God is perfectly holy. Humans are not. An imperfect creature standing in the presence of pure holiness should be scared. It's the logical reaction.

God is also perfectly loving. That's why He sent His Son to save us. By accepting Christ's sacrifice, we can be cleansed of our sins. God makes us holy, and He adopts us as His children. When we are in Christ, we have nothing to fear anymore.

Think about a speed trap on the highway. When you see the patrol car, how do you respond? If you've been driving a bit too fast, you probably experience an adrenaline surge. If you were really speeding, you're probably terrified. Guilt is afraid of justice. But if you weren't speeding, then you have nothing to fear. You notice the officer, but you aren't worried.

The stakes are higher with God than with any highway patrolman.

[thejeff]

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

All across America, Christianity is being challenged in the courts on a daily basis. Michael Newdow and his quixotic challenges against the Pledge of Allegiance come to mind. (And the Pledge isn't even specifically Christian, just generally theist.) Secularists sue to prevent schoolkids from praying. Teachers confiscate Bibles. Religious monuments are constantly under legal threat.

Despite our whining, American Christians actually have it easy. We just have to put up with lawsuits and social pressure. Christians in other countries are literally in danger of being killed for their faith. See The Voice of the Martyrs for more details about anti-Christian persecution around the globe.

Historically, religious believers have done most of the persecuting. That's shameful, but also true. However, secularists have turned the tables these days, and faith is in the crosshairs.

Shalom.

Despite the Christians "whining", most of those are not attempts to persecute Christians, but to keep non-Christians or non-theists from being required to fund or participate in Christian ritual. No one wants to prevent kids from praying in school. The suits have largely been against organized school/government sponsored prayers. The religious monuments under threat are ones on government land or funded by the taxpayers. I don't know about teachers taking away Bibles, but a quick Google pulls up nothing reputable. Perhaps under the same conditions they'd take away any non school books? Disruption, reading during class etc?

And as an occasional atheist, I do find it a little annoying to pledge "under God". It's easiest to understand with a little substitution. How would you feel if you (or your child) had to repeat "under Allah" or to be as generic "under the Goddess"?
And that time honored pledge that it's such a horror to even consider changing? The "under God" part dates only to the 50s. It was added to distinguish us from the godless commies.

It's always amused me that Christians get to play the victim card in the US where they are in so many ways so dominant. Far more societal and political influence than almost anywhere else in the developed world, but anytime they can't get the government to force their beliefs on the rest of us, someone will cry "persecution"


Even in the rest of the world, most of the persecution of Christians is done by other religions. (And there is plenty of persecution of other religions by Christians as well.) The largest exception would be the remaining Communist regimes, particularly China, where they'll persecute anyone who doesn't toe the party line anyway. Religions are only one target.

[Tifone]

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

Secularists sue to prevent schoolkids from praying. Teachers confiscate Bibles.

My friend, the public school of a lay state is a place to /Learn/. I don't say it, it's in the laws of the state you accepted to live in. School is a place to learn maths, english, geography and science. Not Creationism, which is one religious, non-scientific thing. Not praying, because there are places, not of the state, for doing this as a freedom the state consider innate into you and nobody can remove. And not having Bible, because in a school a Bible is just out of place, as it would be everything else not related to teaching to children (from a Superman comic book to Playboy sorry, joking)

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

Basically, Christ's message here is not that we have to literally hate our families. Rather, His message is that we must love Him so much that we are willing to sacrifice anything (or anyone) for Him.

Auch, excuse me but I think no one, NO ONE, could ask to an healthy, sane, person, to sacrifice (I know of course in a non literal way) the people he loves the most in his life, daughters, wives, parents, to a person claiming (you said it) to be God, a person never appeared to me, lived (if lived) 2000 years ago. Not even if they believe in something else than him.

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

Jesus was telling a parable in Luke 19, the Parable of the Ten Minas. Those words you quoted are spoken by Jesus, but they're actually the words of the king in the parable.

True, I'm sorry if it wasn't clear it was a Parable. But you should go further talking. The parable is something Jesus uses in that occasion to talk about the Reign of God, as it is said in that paragraph. The king is God, clearly, without any need of interpretation. You have read the chapter. "Kill whoever doesn't accept me", in the mouth of Jesus - who IS God himself - doesn't sound any better thinking at it as a parable and "not literal".

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

As with the quote from Luke 14, Jesus is trying to warn His followers about the high cost of following Him. The Gospel divides people based on belief. Those who believe Jesus are fundamentally different from those who do not believe.

Well, maybe that is my main problem with the whole thing. Religion (not only yours) divides people (families! The Bible itself says so) of today's complex and ever-changing world, on world views that are at the best, what? 2000 years old.
You may say they are still valid. I read the Old Testament, or the Quran and I say no, the world is changed, the world MUST CONTINUE CHANGING to go far from these world views of DIVISION and HATRED, not to talk about lapidation and mass murder. Those words cannot have been inspired by a perfect and loving god for me. There must be a mistake, those are the words of a tyrant of cavemen. I just can't accept it.

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

That said, it is also important to understand that Christians interpret the Old Testament in the light of Jesus. [...] So we don't ignore the Hebrew Scriptures, but we do understand them in a very different way from most Jews.

Please, tell me how the light of Jesus can make you understand in a (as rational as possible) way, this (almost random quote):

"Now KILL ALL THE BOYS AMONG THE LITTLE ONES. And KILL EVERY WOMAN WHO AS SLEPT WITH A MAN, but SAVE FOR YOURSELF every GIRL OF YOUNG AGE who has never slept with a man." [Numbers 31:17-18]

It is Moses (one of the greater prophets of your religion) which says in the God-inspired Bible what to do to the prisoners of a war against a city, a war which is THE VENGEANCE OF GOD, Numbers 31:3
You talk about the lens of Jesus, my friend, but I fear no lens can let me accept those fearful, full of hate words, in the mouth of a God someone believes in. (Note, the WORDS, not the BELIEVER himself)

Still, of course, nothing against you. A hug and my best wishes.

[SlipperyJim]

So. Many. Responses! I'm going to skip over the political stuff, because politics is being talked to death these days....

Originally Posted by Tifone

Auch, excuse me but I think no one, NO ONE, could ask to an healthy, sane, person, to sacrifice (I know of course in a non literal way) the people he loves the most in his life, daughters, wives, parents, to a person claiming (you said it) to be God, a person never appeared to me, lived (if lived) 2000 years ago. Not even if they believe in something else than him.

If that person was able to prove that He was God, then you'd better believe I'd listen to Him. I'd be nuts to ignore Him!

Here's the main point: God must be first for those who claim to believe in Him. He gave us His life. We must give Him our lives.

Here's the other point: If my parents do not believe in Jesus as Lord, they will not experience eternal life. There will be no happy ending for them. When they die, they will suffer for eternity. That's bad. Under the circumstances, I would be a poor son indeed if I stood to the side and allowed my parents to go to Hell without making every effort to prevent it. I must be a witness to them. However, my witnessing will cause division between us, at least in the short term.

So what should I do? Should I stop witnessing to preserve short-term peace, while knowing that the long-term effects will be horrible beyond belief? Or should I risk some short-term conflict in order to influence my parents toward salvation?

Real-world analogy: If your parents were smoking six packs of cigarettes every day, would you try to get them to quit? What if your parents were already showing signs of poor health -- lung cancer, emphysema, asthma -- would that encourage you toward greater efforts on their behalf? But trying to get them to quit smoking will be tense! They might resent you for interfering in their lives. What now?

The dilemma is that I cannot witness to them if I allow our relationship to become completely estranged. Furthermore, the Bible tells me very clearly that I must honor my parents. So I must walk a middle ground. I try to maintain a cordial relationship with my parents (including frequent contact with my kids, their grandkids), but I also maintain my witness. It's not easy, but few worthwhile things are easy.

Originally Posted by Tifone

True, I'm sorry if it wasn't clear it was a Parable. But you should go further talking. The parable is something Jesus uses in that occasion to talk about the Reign of God, as it is said in that paragraph. The king is God, clearly, without any need of interpretation. You have read the chapter. "Kill whoever doesn't accept me", in the mouth of Jesus - who IS God himself - doesn't sound any better thinking at it as a parable and "not literal".

When you carry the parable into the Kingdom of God -- which is the valid interpretation -- you also pick up some other context. The new factor to consider is grace. God doesn't want you to perish. He wants to save you. In fact, He wants to save you so badly that He sent His Son to die for you.

He has also taken every step to make sure that you know the stakes. He has given us His Word. He has ordered His followers to tell you about Him. You cannot claim ignorance. In fact, since you seem to know more about Scripture than many believers, you especially cannot claim ignorance.

Given all of that, what then should God do with an unbeliever at the final judgment? Salvation can only be found in God. In other words, the only way to save you is to join you to Himself. Do you want Him to do that against your will? What kind of loving God would bind people to Himself for all eternity without their consent? That's not love, it's slavery. So He lets you go to destruction. He doesn't enjoy it -- and neither should His followers -- but there's no other way. You've chosen to separate yourself from God, so He honors your choice.

Sadly, separation from God is not the neverending party that unbelievers want to believe.

Originally Posted by Tifone

Well, maybe that is my main problem with the whole thing. Religion (not only yours) divides people (families! The Bible itself says so) of today's complex and ever-changing world, on world views that are at the best, what? 2000 years old.
You may say they are still valid. I read the Old Testament, or the Quran and I say no, the world is changed, the world MUST CONTINUE CHANGING to go far from these world views of DIVISION and HATRED, not to talk about lapidation and mass murder. Those words cannot have been inspired by a perfect and loving god for me. There must be a mistake, those are the words of a tyrant of cavemen. I just can't accept it.

A divided world was never part of God's plan. He created humanity to live in unity with Him and each other. But we screwed it up. When the Bible speaks about division and hatred, those aren't good things. Division and hatred are the consequences of human sin. The Bible is just being honest about them.

Even when the Bible commands division or hatred (for example, the conquest of the Promised Land), it's a reaction to sin. God commanded the Israelites to destroy the Canaanites because of the Caananites' appalling sins. He also wanted to protect the Israelites -- His chosen people -- from being led astray. Unfortunately, His people didn't obey Him as well as they should have, so they were led astray, and the consequences were disastrous.

Originally Posted by Tifone

Please, tell me how the light of Jesus can make you understand in a (as rational as possible) way, this (almost random quote):

"Now KILL ALL THE BOYS AMONG THE LITTLE ONES. And KILL EVERY WOMAN WHO AS SLEPT WITH A MAN, but SAVE FOR YOURSELF every GIRL OF YOUNG AGE who has never slept with a man." [Numbers 31:17-18]

It is Moses (one of the greater prophets of your religion) which says in the God-inspired Bible what to do to the prisoners of a war against a city, a war which is THE VENGEANCE OF GOD, Numbers 31:3
You talk about the lens of Jesus, my friend, but I fear no lens can let me accept those fearful, full of hate words, in the mouth of a God someone believes in. (Note, the WORDS, not the BELIEVER himself)

The pagan natives of the Promised Land were a very wicked people. The conquest of Israel was so thorough that we don't know too much about them, but we do know that they practiced human sacrifice. And that children were among the sacrifices. The full extent of their iniquities have been lost to history, but whatever they had done, it was so bad that God decided they couldn't be redeemed. They were too wicked to save. Just as a surgeon cuts out a tumor to heal a person, sometimes God destroys sin rather than allow it to spread.

Again, human sin was not part of God's original plan for us. And when He returns, we won't have to worry about it anymore. The lion will lie down with the lamb, and all suffering will be no more than a bad memory.

Originally Posted by Tifone

Still, of course, nothing against you. A hug and my best wishes.

Same here.

[thejeff]

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

Here's the other point: If my parents do not believe in Jesus as Lord, they will not experience eternal life. There will be no happy ending for them. When they die, they will suffer for eternity. That's bad. Under the circumstances, I would be a poor son indeed if I stood to the side and allowed my parents to go to Hell without making every effort to prevent it. I must be a witness to them. However, my witnessing will cause division between us, at least in the short term.

(Much snipped to address one point.)
Witnessing to your parents is, as you suggest, a matter between you and them. But this very argument, that those who do not believe in Jesus as Lord will suffer for eternity has been used to justify so much horror throughout history, that I simply cannot accept it even in a mild form. The Inquisition, forcible conversion of other cultures, etc, etc. All for their own good, since nothing we do to them can compare with Hell. Even if these savages won't convert we can take their children and teach them God's Word.

I assume you wouldn't approve of this, but really why not? Once you assume an eternity of suffering, how is it not good to try to spare people that by any means necessary.



And to comment briefly on a few other points:
If God is all-powerful, how can an entire culture be beyond redemption? (And that's assuming the historical accuracy of a document written well after the fact by the victors, who might have some small motivation for making their enemies look worse.)

And why was the sacrifice of Jesus necessary at all? It seems a particularly messy way to bring about salvation. It makes perfect sense viewed through the culture of the time and place. The redemption through sacrifice concept makes sense in old Middle Eastern culture/theology, but not in the context of an all-powerful, all-loving god.

[SlipperyJim]

Originally Posted by thejeff

(Much snipped to address one point.)
Witnessing to your parents is, as you suggest, a matter between you and them. But this very argument, that those who do not believe in Jesus as Lord will suffer for eternity has been used to justify so much horror throughout history, that I simply cannot accept it even in a mild form. The Inquisition, forcible conversion of other cultures, etc, etc. All for their own good, since nothing we do to them can compare with Hell. Even if these savages won't convert we can take their children and teach them God's Word.

I assume you wouldn't approve of this, but really why not? Once you assume an eternity of suffering, how is it not good to try to spare people that by any means necessary.

Conversion by force doesn't work. Jesus wants you to follow Him freely. He wants your heart, not merely your surface obedience. For example, see Amos 5.

If God was only interested in forced obedience, He would take it. Yet He has given us free will. If God Himself won't take away your free will, what right would I have to do the same thing?

The Inqusition and other examples of forced conversion are among the shames of the Church. We elevated ourselves above our stature and claimed a privilege that not even God Himself has claimed. God's Word tells us to be faithful witnesses. That's our mandate, and no more than that.

Originally Posted by thejeff

And to comment briefly on a few other points:
If God is all-powerful, how can an entire culture be beyond redemption? (And that's assuming the historical accuracy of a document written well after the fact by the victors, who might have some small motivation for making their enemies look worse.)

I don't know why the original inhabitants of the Promised Land were beyond redemption. I can hazard a guess that God calculated their likelihood of redemption was far less than the certainty that they would tempt the Israelites into destruction, so He had to destroy them as a threat to His chosen people. Again, we have to remember free will. God wouldn't force them to repent of their wickedness, because that would take away their free will. He had to convince them. Presumably, He gave them sufficient opportunity to prove to His own infallible judgment that they would never turn away from their wickedness....

But really, I don't know. I'm not God.

Originally Posted by thejeff

And why was the sacrifice of Jesus necessary at all? It seems a particularly messy way to bring about salvation. It makes perfect sense viewed through the culture of the time and place. The redemption through sacrifice concept makes sense in old Middle Eastern culture/theology, but not in the context of an all-powerful, all-loving god.

Christ's sacrifice was necessary to satisfy the demands of God's justice. We had sinned. Over and over. And we are going to continue sinning. Someone had to pay a price for all of that sin. As an act of supreme love, God paid that price Himself by sending His Son to die for us.

Remember: Jesus is also God. He is the second Person of the Holy Trinity. God didn't pick some random Jewish carpenter and use him as a scapegoat for the world. Instead, He satisfied His own justice by paying the price Himself.

How would you have done it?

[Tifone]

Hello, me again here. Nice to see how this discussion is becoming interesting. I think all of us will learn something here, even from positions not shared, if we just keep open minded. Wow, lots of responses here around the time I was to university ^_^

I want to thank expecially SlipperyJim who is continuing to keep his position, and even giving attention to my rants, in a totally polite way. I don't share virtually any of his world views, but he is an excellent and interesting debater.

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

If that person was able to prove that He was God, then you'd better believe I'd listen to Him. I'd be nuts to ignore Him!

Ok, I would like to go to the lenghts here, but I'm really weak and tired after 8 hours of university. For that, really, I need to ask you to pardon the somewhat "rude" way I say = Prove it to me.

Please, of course, not quoting the Bible. I could just prove almost everything true with circular logic - God isn't real just because the Bible says so, as the Bible was written to prove this God to be real - just like the ancient Greek legends of Zeus' "miracles" were made to prove him real and still I don't believe them too.

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

For example, the parting of the Red Sea is frequently dismissed as a fable, even by modern Christians. But God's power over the elements is an integral part of His divinity. He made the waters, so He can certainly order them to part. Power over the elements was part of how Christ proved His own divinity, when He calmed the storm on the Sea of Galilee.

[...]

There's another point to consider. The crowning miracle of Christianity is the Resurrection. Without the Resurrection, the entire faith falls apart. It seems to me that raising a dead man back to life is at least as big a "trick" as parting the sea. So why would I believe in the Resurrection, yet reject the rest of the miracles?

It always confuses me how your God had no problem to do LOTS of HUGE miracles in the past, becoming so evident -resurrecting people, parting seas, casting flame storms on cities- not really leaving place to the free will to believe or not believe of the observers, and now that it would be easy for Him to prove wrong all today's sceptics doing ONE real miracle on CNN, He seems to have become shy (sorry, again, didn't want to sound rude, the words just came out in a somewhat ironic way )

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

Here's the other point: If my parents do not believe in Jesus as Lord, they will not experience eternal life. There will be no happy ending for them. When they die, they will suffer for eternity. That's bad.

If even you would prove that your God is real, and not one clearly created by man like Thor, Apollo, Zeus, Moloch, Chtulu, the FSM, which may or may not be have been worshipped now or in the past... and he is the only God, and not the Hindu ones i.e... Heck, even if He would appear in front of my face and being this way... Well sorry I wouldn't actually WORSHIP him. Not a God which consider the natural DOUBT (which he left leaving actually not even a REAL PROOF of him) so wicked that he sends billions of even GOOD people to BURN FOREVER just for this.

Also, excuse me, but I have to think if there is really a/some God/Goddess/Gods who have created all the billions of billions of stars and gigantic galaxies and the life forms from the lower bacteria to the most complex ones, I can't really see him/she/them in a so "little" and "wretched" activity like looking is every of his little creations' hearts, divide the ones who believe from the one who don't, and expect them do die to send the first ones in an all shiny and happy place and the other ones to SUFFER FOREVER. Period.

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

Sadly, separation from God is not the neverending party that unbelievers want to believe.

Ok, I really hope this was a mistake from you, because this is not be respectful at all. "Neverending party"? What are you talking about? People live their lives. They work, they suffer, they rejoice, they gain and lose precious people for them. All with the morals from their religion, Christian or not, or from their coscience. No "neverending party" for nobody (ok, only for those ducks of My Super Sweet Sixteen on MTV, may they really burn forever, no, joking again ^_^ ). Also, agnostic and atheists and buddhists don't see neverending parties anywhere, and surely not in any "afterlife".

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

A divided world was never part of God's plan.

[...]

Again, human sin was not part of God's original plan for us. And when He returns, we won't have to worry about it anymore. The lion will lie down with the lamb, and all suffering will be no more than a bad memory.

Man, you are negating that your God is omniscient, or what? He couldn't have made a PLAN without involving EVERYTHING in it if he actually KNOWED everything that was gonna happen.

Originally Posted by Agema

It is logically consistent to say that although God is perfect, any communication he could render to humans must be interpreted by imperfect human understanding.

You are saying God is ALL-POWERFUL but he |||CAN'T||| make a person understand him and write his words correctly, just because he is ancient and ineducated?? He wants to save humanity with his message and gives it in the hands of an almost-caveman WITHOUT TAKING THE LITTLE TIME AND ENERGY (for Him) to make him UNDERSTAND his words and WRITE THEM CORRECTLY, and thus CONDEMNING all the naturally doubtful to NEVERENDING PAIN?? Seems like blasphemy ^_^ Sorry, joke

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

Even when the Bible commands division or hatred (for example, the conquest of the Promised Land), it's a reaction to sin.

?

"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and CREATE EVIL: I the LORD do all these things." [Isaiah 45:7]

"Shall there be EVIL in a city, and the LORD hath not DONE it?" [Amos 3:6]

Best wishes to everybody

[SlipperyJim]

Firstly, thanks to all of the people who have thanked me. It is challenging to be the only (as far as I can tell) fundamentalist Christian in a virtual sea of agnostics, atheists, and other believers. If I don't answer a particular post, please don't be offended. There's only so much typing that my ten fingers can do....

Thanks also to the assorted agnostics, atheists, and other believers who are participating. We have (mostly) managed to keep an even keel and a respectful tone, and those qualities are truly rare in online debates. Especially online debates about religion.

On to the responses:

Originally Posted by Tifone

Ok, I would like to go to the lenghts here, but I'm really weak and tired after 8 hours of university. For that, really, I need to ask you to pardon the somewhat "rude" way I say = Prove it to me.

Please, of course, not quoting the Bible.

Firstly, I object to the notion that you can reject the Bible as evidence. Even if you disregard the divine inspiration of the Bible, it's still an astounding collection of primary source material. We know more about Jesus than we know about Socrates (for example), and historical documents are our primary sources of knowledge.

By the way, the Jewish historian Josephus mentioned Jesus in his writings. Josephus never mentioned Christ's divinity, but his writing should be enough to prove (at the very least) that there was a guy named Jesus in first-century Judea who seems to correlate with the Jesus of the Gospels.

Nevertheless, I can meet your challenge in the same way that the earliest apostles did. I have met Jesus. Not physically, of course, but in ways that were utterly real nonetheless. I have seen His power at work in my life and in the lives of others around me. I cannot doubt the power of God through Christ any more than I could doubt the existence of the sun, the wind, or the force of gravity.

Logic also insists that there's something real to the Gospel. Christianity exploded across the Roman Empire in spite of several emperors who tried to stop it. (Nero is the obvious example, but Diocletian wasn't any better.) Now look at the original apostles. A bunch of fishermen, a tax collector, and a former persecutor of the faith. They weren't the most-likely candidates to lead a spiritual revival, but they did it anyway. That's either a lot of coincidence, or the power of God.

The fate of the original apostles also reinforces their claims. Every one of the eleven (not counting Judas Iscariot) suffered for the faith. Ten of them died for it, and John was exiled to the island of Patmos. These guys all knew Jesus personally. If He had been a fake, wouldn't they have known about it? If so, why would they have been willing to die for a lie?

Originally Posted by Tifone

It always confuses me how your God had no problem to do LOTS of HUGE miracles in the past, becoming so evident -resurrecting people, parting seas, casting flame storms on cities- not really leaving place to the free will to believe or not believe of the observers, and now that it would be easy for Him to prove wrong all today's sceptics doing ONE real miracle on CNN, He seems to have become shy (sorry, again, didn't want to sound rude, the words just came out in a somewhat ironic way )

That's a fair question, but you have to really think about it. What do you suppose would happen if God performed a big, showy miracle today? Before you answer, remember that there are people who still believe that 9/11 was faked and that the Twin Towers were destroyed by a controlled demolition....

It wouldn't work. Skeptics would raise questions. So-called experts would prove how the miracle could have been done through science, special effects, or mass hypnosis. You can't force people to believe, even if you raise someone from the dead.

That's the very point that Jesus addressed in the parable about Lazarus the beggar & the rich man (as recorded in Luke 16):

There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores and longing to eat what fell from the rich man's table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.

The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried. In hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. So he called to him, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.'

But Abraham replied, 'Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.'

He answered, 'Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father's house, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.'

Abraham replied, 'They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.'

'No, father Abraham,' he said, 'but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.'

He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.'

Shortly thereafter, Jesus rose from the dead ... and people still didn't believe Him.

Originally Posted by Tifone

Well sorry I wouldn't actually WORSHIP him. Not a God which consider the natural DOUBT (which he left leaving actually not even a REAL PROOF of him) so wicked that he sends billions of even GOOD people to BURN FOREVER just for this.

Doubt is not your problem. Many believers have doubted. Mother Theresa doubted. The apostle Thomas doubted.

Excuse me for saying so, but your problem is a failure to grasp your condition. You seem to believe that you deserve Heaven on your own merits. You don't. None of us deserve Heaven on our own merits. Heaven is perfect, and we aren't.

By the way, how "good" do you have to be in order to be GOOD? Where's the line between good and not-good?

Let's take the average guy. He doesn't hurt anyone, not usually. Maybe he drives a little too fast, but he hasn't actually killed anyone yet. He gets a little short-tempered, and he occasionally has a harsh word for his wife or his kids. But we all do that, right? In spite of that, he deeply loves his family. He would give his life for them, but he hasn't been required to do that yet. He's a good worker, even though he spends a little too much time on the Web when he should be working. He's nice to people most of the time. Some people would miss him if he died.

Is this guy good enough for Heaven? Is he worthy of perfection? What if he worked a little bit harder?

Alone among all of the religions, Christianity recognizes the true problem. None of us is truly righteous [Romans 3:10]. Even when we think we're being good, most of us are usually seeking some sort of reward or praise. Genuine self-sacrificing love (with nothing to be gained by it) is darned rare in our broken world, whereas evil seems commonplace. How would humans rise above these problems to become worthy of God?

We can't do it. So God came to us. He gives us the worthiness and righteousness that we cannot attain on our own. And He gives it to us for free, because He already paid the price.

One of my favorite quotes on this subject goes something like:
"Christianity is not a religion. Religion is all about people working toward God. God is smart enough to know that we can't possibly reach Him, so He came to us. Christianity is simply living with Christ in your life."

Originally Posted by Tifone

Ok, I really hope this was a mistake from you, because this is not be respectful at all. "Neverending party"? What are you talking about?

I was referring to a popular misconception that life would be great if only God would leave us alone to enjoy it. Perhaps my language was too strong, and I apologize for any offense.

I am well aware that life is not a neverending party.

Originally Posted by Tifone

Man, you are negating that your God is omniscient, or what? He couldn't have made a PLAN without involving EVERYTHING in it if he actually KNOWED everything that was gonna happen.

You're confusing God's omniscience with His perfect will. Yes, God knew we were going to fall from grace. He knew we were going to sin. That's why He planned for our redemption from the very beginning of time.

But knowing something bad is going to happen does not mean the same thing as actually planning for it to happen. For example, I know that my kids are probably making trouble for my wife during homeschooling today. (Yup, we homeschool.) Do I want that to happen? No. Would I be delighted if it didn't happen? Sure! But I know it's probably going to happen anyway, so I make my plans for how to respond to it.

In the same way, although God knew we were going to fall from grace, He didn't want it to happen. He even made plans to redeem us after our Fall. But He couldn't have prevented our Fall without taking away our free will, so He allowed it to happen.

Originally Posted by Tifone

You are saying God is ALL-POWERFUL but he |||CAN'T||| make a person understand him and write his words correctly, just because he is ancient and ineducated?? He wants to save humanity with his message and gives it in the hands of an almost-caveman WITHOUT TAKING THE LITTLE TIME AND ENERGY (for Him) to make him UNDERSTAND his words and WRITE THEM CORRECTLY, and thus CONDEMNING all the naturally doubtful to NEVERENDING PAIN?? Seems like blasphemy ^_^ Sorry, joke

Actually, you're quite correct. If the Bible isn't reliable, then God is not God. Fortunately, the Bible is reliable and clear.

Actually, the clarity of the Bible is another point toward why it should be trusted. Think about it. The books of the Bible were written over thousands of years by many different human beings. Their cultural backgrounds, languages, and environments all changed many times, but the message stayed the same. God loves His people and wants to save them. Sadly, we keep screwing up the plan because we want to be in control. Only by accepting the grace of God and asking Him into our lives can we ever find happiness and holiness.

Originally Posted by Tifone

?

"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and CREATE EVIL: I the LORD do all these things." [Isaiah 45:7]

"Shall there be EVIL in a city, and the LORD hath not DONE it?" [Amos 3:6]

Best wishes to everybody

What translation are you using? The NIV renders Isaiah 45:7 a bit differently:

I form the light and create darkness,
I bring prosperity and create disaster;
I, the LORD, do all these things.

The NASB has:

The One forming light and creating darkness,
Causing well-being and creating calamity;
I am the LORD who does all these.

The point in this verse is God's sovereignty. In context, the verse is part of God's explicit endorsement of Cyrus (a pagan king!) as the agent of God's will and deliverer of God's people. God is not the author of Evil. However, He is lord of all, and He can use destruction to fulfill His purposes.

Your citation of Amos 3:6 suffers from a similar problem. NIV:

When a trumpet sounds in a city,
do not the people tremble?
When disaster comes to a city,
has not the LORD caused it?

NASB:

If a trumpet is blown in a city will not the people tremble?
If a calamity occurs in a city has not the LORD done it?

God is not claiming authorship of Evil. Rather, He is forcefully stating His sovereignty, even going so far as to declare that He can use disaster & destruction as part of His plans.

Hmmm ... so I did a little comparison, and it appears that you're using the good ol' King James Version for your quotations. I love the KJV because of its poetic language and beautiful cadences. In fact, I still recite the Lord's Prayer in KJV English.

The problem is that the KJV English is distinctive because it is old. The English language has changed a bit since King James's day, and those changes can make the KJV a little tricky to understand. If you like the KJV, may I recommend the New King James Version (NKJV) for you? It uses much of the same poetic, beautiful language, but it also uses modern words to avoid confusing modern readers.