OT Yes, God does speak to me (and others)

[tinselwolverine]

KAWDUP < RABID < Tinsel

KAWDUP did win it all in the Bowl Pick'ems game, though.

 

[RABID]

KAWDUP did win it all in the Bowl Pick'ems game, though.

PFFFFFFFFFFFFFF.


Semifinal
(1) Wolverineinnc132.44
(4) MichiganMan_24_93.63

Semifinal
(3) KAWDUP95.32
(2) Rabidnators103.46

Final
(1) Wolverineinnc126.61
(2) Rabidnators158.93

3rd Place Game
(4) MichiganMan_24_117.09
(3) KAWDUP102.23

League Champion
Rabidnators

2nd Wolverineinnc
3rd MichiganMan_24_
4th KAWDUP
5th Boys in BLUE
6th Geaux Saints

 

[KAWDUP]

If there are books in the OT that can be considered as allegory, then you're reading a book of fiction.

In fact, the OT reads exactly like what a man of that time period would want out of society. It doesn't read like something that the God I was taught about as a child would say. The NT is a bit more progressive, which is why I think so many Christians relate more with it. It's super inconvenient when you read in the OT that slavery and rape are okay, so read the NT. Much more sunshine and rainbows.

Maybe missing my definition of allegory. Maybe symbolic is a better word? I certainly don't equate symbolic to fiction? do you?

BTW - exactly true again on considering the context of what is there. That is why it must be taken into account when determining its value. Why would one think, that a writer of the bible wouldn't use the context of their own time period? The question is whether you can completely devalue it based on that, or is there some meaning there for us today? Certainly you have completely discounted it because the vindictive and violent results go against everything in your value system, but that certainly doesn't mean there is nothing to be gained from its understanding in context. Probably deserves a better example, but I will leave it to say that while people are obsessed with proving that Noah's ark, and Sodom and Gomorrah truly existed, there is value in considering the symbolic meaning of what is being presented.

You discount it because you don't want to believe a benevolent God would ever do that - but you seem to be taking for granted the literal interpretation already, rather than looking for the meaning. I can believe in God and still understand what the story is trying to get across. Why would you get hung up on what someone else's interpretation would mean for the personal relationship with God that I talk about? Why let others determine that interpretation for you thus making you never want to believe in a God that can do that?

I get you have trouble with the OT God - very few people never have any doubts there. I don't think it changes what God really wants for you. Take that with a grain of salt, of course, as others will disagree with me here, but that is how I view it.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Jesus was all into symbolism in them stories he used to tell.

 

[KAWDUP]

PFFFFFFFFFFFFFF.


Semifinal
(1) Wolverineinnc132.44
(4) MichiganMan_24_93.63

Semifinal
(3) KAWDUP95.32
(2) Rabidnators103.46

Final
(1) Wolverineinnc126.61
(2) Rabidnators158.93

3rd Place Game
(4) MichiganMan_24_117.09
(3) KAWDUP102.23

League Champion
Rabidnators

2nd Wolverineinnc
3rd MichiganMan_24_
4th KAWDUP
5th Boys in BLUE
6th Geaux Saints

Wasn't this the NFL fantasy league? I win (or certainly beat RABID) in my share of these things. Does this mean anything about the absolute truth of your statement. I certainly don't believe it, so it can't possibly be true. :*)

 

[byco42]

God nailed his only Son to a tree. There's a litany of martyrs and saints who experienced incredible suffering. Why should we expect any different? We are a culture centered on temporary comfort on earth rather than eternal life in heaven. That's where all the discord, distrust and disappointment stem from. Turn it on its head and things will seem completely different. Focus on heaven and this stage of life will suddenly appear a lot clearer. The Lord's Prayer says it all. You can medidate on that for months. You can comtemplate select phrases of it for months. Or you can select isolated biblical phrases to use against Him to support your own disbelief. I pray the Rosary, turn away from sin and turn to God. I will accept whatever becomes of it.

 

[redandguilty]

KAWDUP < RABID < Tinsel

Last year, I predicted a record of 15 or 16 wins and no losses. That's got to count for something.

 

[RABID]

Last year, I predicted a record of 15 or 16 wins and no losses. That's got to count for something.

I agree.

+1

 

[GoBlueInAtlanta]

By definition actually! ... I must be crazy.

A young adolescent boy praying (preying?) to meet a girl. NO WAY!

And then going out and actually TALKING to a cute girl and getting a date? OMG!


And the date led to a relationship? It could only be divine intervention!
(Of course I've seen that happen many times at partys and in bars, but we are all god's children aren't we? "Oh GOD! PLEASE help me meet a hot chick tonight!")

And after she breaks up with him, he pines away for years, and she finally comes around and starts dating this boy who has devoted his life to her? Human nature. She gave it another shot after playing the field and watching you on the sidelines. Chicks dig feeling that devotion, and she was fortunate that you waited for her.

"You got lucky babe, when I found you."- Tom Petty

Ummmm...you missed the point. Did you read all the way to the end, Mr. RABID? The last sentence was -

This story is one of answered prayer, but even more so, about the trust that I have in Him to wait, even if it takes years, for His promises to be fulfilled.

 

[GoBlueInAtlanta]

Sorry Kawdup. This is false.
There is no absolute truth in ethics.

Relativism is a whole new debate. Truth is based on perception.
Absolute truth is the opposite of faith.

"Absolute truth is the opposite of faith." Nope.


Either it's absolute truth that God created all of this or it is absolute truth that He did not.

Some, such as I, have faith that He did create it and some have faith that He did not.

One is absolute truth and the ones who have faith in it are right.

One is false and those who believe in it are wrong.

It would be more accurate to say that absolute knowledge is the opposite of faith.

 

[GoBlueInAtlanta]

PS - Lots of good discussion while I was gone. The new job is consuming my time.

 

[Monster]

God nailed his only Son to a tree. There's a litany of martyrs and saints who experienced incredible suffering. Why should we expect any different? We are a culture centered on temporary comfort on earth rather than eternal life in heaven. That's where all the discord, distrust and disappointment stem from. Turn it on its head and things will seem completely different. Focus on heaven and this stage of life will suddenly appear a lot clearer. The Lord's Prayer says it all. You can medidate on that for months. You can comtemplate select phrases of it for months. Or you can select isolated biblical phrases to use against Him to support your own disbelief. I pray the Rosary, turn away from sin and turn to God. I will accept whatever becomes of it.

But, you assume that God is real when you speak of these things. Yes, in a book, Jesus was nailed to a cross. Yes, in a book, you can go to Heaven if you believe. There are other holy books out there, you know? They say different things, so why not believe in them?

And, yes, in a book that I live my life by, I don't expect to read certain phrases like, "If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever."

It's all sunshine and rainbows for Christians and they constantly deny the evils of the bible, all because they desire to not disappear after they die. I understand that death is scary, but that doesn't mean there has to be something after.

 

[byco42]

But, you assume that God is real when you speak of these things. Yes, in a book, Jesus was nailed to a cross. Yes, in a book, you can go to Heaven if you believe. There are other holy books out there, you know? They say different things, so why not believe in them?

One: I challenge their holiness. Two: only the Bible claims that Jesus died to redeem us from our sins and conquered death.

It's an historical fact that a man named Jesus lived and was crucified by Pontius Pilate. Sources other than the Bible validate this. Tacitus, the most renown and respected Roman historian of his day, for one. He's one of several. This man Jesus claimed to be the Son of God. There are other writers (Gospels) who witnessed his life who recorded it. Jesus was either a liar, lunatic or Lord. I choose to believe the latter.

Other books and writings of the time inform you of events historical--do you doubt them in the same way? And would any one person, let alone four, record the life of Jesus knowing it was a falsehood in the tedious manner they undertook?

And, yes, in a book that I live my life by, I don't expect to read certain phrases like, "If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever."

It's all sunshine and rainbows for Christians and they constantly deny the evils of the bible, all because they desire to not disappear after they die. I understand that death is scary, but that doesn't mean there has to be something after.

Because something is written in the OT does not necessarily mean that it applies to the present day. You are quoting from Exodus, a book that was written 2,400 years ago, that chronicles the covenant between the people of Isreal and God. You have to account for the context of the society at the time.

Catholics do not ascribe to the "sola scriptura" of other Christian denominations. The Bible is not an "evil" book, because it depicts at the laws governing servants 2,400 years ago. It's easy to read some other passages that illustrate the importance of caring for each other and the meaning of being a follower of Christ.

If God did not exist, there would be no athiests.

 

[KAWDUP]

But, you assume that God is real when you speak of these things. Yes, in a book, Jesus was nailed to a cross. Yes, in a book, you can go to Heaven if you believe. There are other holy books out there, you know? They say different things, so why not believe in them?

And, yes, in a book that I live my life by, I don't expect to read certain phrases like, "If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever."

It's all sunshine and rainbows for Christians and they constantly deny the evils of the bible, all because they desire to not disappear after they die. I understand that death is scary, but that doesn't mean there has to be something after.

From a wiki, but still widely accepted:

Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and although there is little agreement on the historicity of gospel narratives and their theological assertions of his divinity, biblical scholars and classical historians regard theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted. Most scholars agree that Jesus was a Galilean Jew who was born between 7 and 2 BC and died 30?36 AD. Most scholars hold that Jesus lived in Galilee and Judea, did not preach or study elsewhere and that he spoke Aramaic and may have also spoken Hebrew and possibly Greek. Although scholars differ on the reconstruction of the specific episodes of the life of Jesus, the two events whose historicity is subject to "almost universal assent" are that he was baptized by John the Baptist and shortly afterwards was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.

I have no idea why you keep referring to sunshine and rainbows. What if I hate sunshine and rainbows? Don't tell me you are using an idiom to comment on all of Christendom - pretty stereotypical. Especially since all evidence on this board seems to run contrary to that.

One other thing: salvation is an adjunct to believing in the resurrection, not an excuse to believe in God and Jesus.

 

[RABID]

Ummmm...you missed the point. Did you read all the way to the end, Mr. RABID? The last sentence was -

This story is one of answered prayer, but even more so, about the trust that I have in Him to wait, even if it takes years, for His promises to be fulfilled.

I did read it all. Again the impass of faith vs. coincidence, or quite possibly could be a testiment to the impossible standards you set for the rest of the male species. :tup:

 

[RABID]

"Absolute truth is the opposite of faith." Nope.


Either it's absolute truth that God created all of this or it is absolute truth that He did not.

Some, such as I, have faith that He did create it and some have faith that He did not.

One is absolute truth and the ones who have faith in it are right.

One is false and those who believe in it are wrong.

It would be more accurate to say that absolute knowledge is the opposite of faith.

Didn't you just reinforce what I said after refuting it? Yes you did.

Absolute truth is fact, unalterable, permanant.
Faith is confidence, trust, belief without proof.

When a fact is proven, it replaces faith.
Absolute truth supersedes faith.

 

[tinselwolverine]

I understand that death is scary, but that doesn't mean there has to be something after.

"Dying is easy. Comedy is hard." - Attributed to a number of notable people in comtemporary history.

 

[RABID]

From a wiki, but still widely accepted:

Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and although there is little agreement on the historicity of gospel narratives and their theological assertions of his divinity, biblical scholars and classical historians regard theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted. Most scholars agree that Jesus was a Galilean Jew who was born between 7 and 2 BC and died 30?36 AD. Most scholars hold that Jesus lived in Galilee and Judea, did not preach or study elsewhere and that he spoke Aramaic and may have also spoken Hebrew and possibly Greek. Although scholars differ on the reconstruction of the specific episodes of the life of Jesus, the two events whose historicity is subject to "almost universal assent" are that he was baptized by John the Baptist and shortly afterwards was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.

I have no idea why you keep referring to sunshine and rainbows. What if I hate sunshine and rainbows? Don't tell me you are using an idiom to comment on all of Christendom - pretty stereotypical. Especially since all evidence on this board seems to run contrary to that.

One other thing: salvation is an adjunct to believing in the resurrection, not an excuse to believe in God and Jesus.

I don't think anyone has refuted the existance of Jesus. It would be like refuting the existance of Plato or even Mohammed.

I think what is being refuted is whether religion is truth, or a powerful tool created by ancient leaders to unite and command the populations through stories. By answering their questions of where did we come from, why should we listen to you, and what happens when we die. Only the scholars and social elite could read and write back then. The peasants and slaves had to take their word for it, and they needed a scheme to stay in power.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Only the scholars and social elite could read and write back then. The peasants and slaves had to take their word for it, and they needed a scheme to stay in power.

Having command of all the weapons didn't hurt, either.

 

[RABID]

If God did not exist, there would be no athiests.

But isn't athiesm a word made up by religion to stereotype people that do not agree with their views?

At Wolverine Nation, we call people like that trolls.
The worst of which we classify as bucknuts.
And yes, they should be damned to Hell. :hehe: