Google Ads

Google Ads

Bible Wheel Book

Google Ads

+ Reply to Thread
Page 9 of 16 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 159
  1. #81
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    287
    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    I agree with you that Jesus probably would not have approved of "horrendously brutal chattel slavery", but he still implicitly approved of owning human beings as property "slaves". Slavery is an egregious violation of human rights, and no matter how well a slave is treated they are still a person in bondage to another person. Slavery was just as morally wrong in biblical times as it is today. Nowhere in the Bible is slavery ever condemned, in fact as you even mentioned the Biblegod gave commandments on how slaves were to be treated! The Biblegod approved of slavery. Just because people like George Whitefield preached against slavery does not mean the Bible condemned it because it didn't.

    The fact of the matter is that Jesus never once condemned any of the horrendous violations against the human rights of women or slaves found in the Bible, he supported every "jot" and "tittle" of the law because he was deluded by his religion and believed that the Biblegod was his father.


    Kind regards,
    Rose
    Hi Rose,

    I was wondering when you would enter this dialogue, welcome.

    I have to agree with every bit of what you say, in general. It is true specific commandments were given in the OT, regarding slavery, and yes, Jesus, obeying all aspects of the law, would have gone along with that, not to mention his NT teaching about slaves and masters.

    I do think that Paul, writing to Philemon, suggested it was a better thing to attain freedom over slavery, but until that was realised, slaves and masters should obey God in all aspects of their lives. Paul, the prisoner for his faith, wrote Philemon, the slave master, on behalf of his runaway slave, Onesimus, appealing for his mercy toward Onesimus. Consider Philemon 1:15-16:

    "For perhaps he therefore departed for a season, that thou shouldest receive him for ever; Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh, and in the Lord?"

    By suggesting, above a servant, even a beloved brother, and how much better it would be for Philemon, both in the flesh, and in the Lord, if he were to receive Onesimus once again.

    So, Rose, even though there are some admittedly difficult teachings in earlier time frames, I believe that this is another one of those examples where Christ was taking the internal Gospel message well beyond the external limitations of the law of Moses. I am not saying the Law was not internal, it clearly was, but we do know that Jesus Christ brought in a New Covenant, built on better promises, and I think that is hinted at here. That is why most of the legal actions to do away with slavery were initiated by Christians, not atheists.

    Further, Jesus and Paul had as much to say to masters as they did to slaves, as we are all to give an account of our lives to God. Ephesians not only addresses husband-wife, children-parent, but also master-slave relationships. I am sure you are aware of the following Ephesians 6:5-9:

    "Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men: Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free. And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him."

    I think you can see that this is a balanced approach to both masters and slaves, not the type of slavery we are familiar with. That would be good advice for employer-employee relations today (of course I don't mean this should be enforced in the workplace, I merely mean it is a balanced approach to both sides).

    In any event, I am at least appreciative of the fact that you admit that the type of "chattel slavery" practised by the African slave trade was foreign to the teaching of Moses, and commanded by God. There were even inheritance rights. Please do not think that I am in favour of slavery. I merely recognise that this was a period in history that was quite far removed from where we are today, including multiple wives, and marrying of near relatives. And I also thank you for acknowledging that George Whitefield, clearly preached against the evils of slavery in the South. Many people will not admit that, and continue to malign genuine biblical Christianity for all the evils of slavery.

    What do you think is the alternative? How do you determine right from wrong? How do you determine absolutes? I know we all have a moral code in us, but I think even that is a clear indication that God has somehow written His law in our inner being, and our conscious can only accuse or excuse us in our actions and thoughts. I am sure that you know what the Bible says in Romans 1:18-23:

    "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things."

    I think that without God, all that evolution can ever offer us is "an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things."

    I can only hope this softens your heart a little bit toward the God of the Bible,

    dp
    Last edited by dpenn; 08-30-2014 at 05:55 PM.

  2. #82
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    287
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    ... First, there is the idea of predestination. It seems the best interpretation of the Bible is that God chooses the "elect" and so no one can do anything to get saved. But that's contradicted by other passages that clearly appeal to people to make a choice to believe. I reviewed the contrary views (Calvinism vs. Arminianism) but never came to a solution that actually made sense to me and which I could actually believe. So I just "let it ride" like most Christians do with many incoherent aspects of the Gospel.

    Richard
    I am quite certain that we aren't going to resolve Calvinism vs Arminianism here today, but it at least needs to be addressed as it is so central to the Gospel message. I believe the Bible clearly teaches both divine election and predestination, from a Calvinistic perspective. But I also know that God has given us the command to go into all the world and make disciples, offering an external call of the Gospel in the preaching of the Gospel. And even though there is a need for each individual to turn from their sins and receive Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour, it is clear from the teaching of the Bible that God would say, "you did not choose Me, but I chose you". There are deep mysteries in the Bible, some of them are cleared through careful study, others prolong, and still others surface out of seeming nowhere.

    For example, the Bible says that God foreordained that Jesus Christ should be crucified for our sins, suffer and die, in order to be raised from the dead and ascended to His right hand. But evil sinful people put Him on the Cross and crucified Him, and Peter in Acts 2 says that they will be held accountable for this. And yet Isaiah 53 says that it pleased the Father to put Him to death, as He has made Him a sin offering (paraphrase, but true).

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    Another example is the meaning of salvation itself. The most fundamentalist position is that each person must hear the Gospel and explicitly believe in the name of Jesus to be saved. But that means that everyone born before Christ is necessarily damned, and few people actually believe that, so they need to make up doctrines about how folks who never heard get saved. I have many books dealing with these kinds of questions, such as "What about those who never heard?" and "Four Views on Hell" etc. This is what I mean when I say that the Gospel is incoherent. I learned "live with" the incoherence when I was a Christian by just ignoring the questions as best as I could. But as an unbeliever, those very questions now seem like good reasons for rejecting the faith.

    Richard
    I think the most basic biblical meaning of salvation is that because of the sin of Adam, all died spiritually, and will also all die as a result of the curse placed on this disobedience. My understanding of original sin, is not the first sin that Adam sinned, but the consequences of Adam's first sin, namely he, and all of his and Eve's posterity would be born with an inherited, and acquired sinful nature. Thus all die. The two exceptions of Enoch and Elijah are dealt with as special exceptions to this in the Scriptures.

    This introduces us to salvation, as in Adam all die, so also in Christ, all will be made alive. And Ephesians 2 makes it clear that we are all born alienated from God, and under His wrath. So the first thing that salvation acquired through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ was that His blood atoned for our sins. That is, as a perfect sacrifice, as a lamb brought to slaughter, He actually turned away the wrath of God. In other words, He bore the full punishment of God against sin for all those who place their faith and trust in Him. So salvation means that first, Jesus Christ lived a perfect sinless life before God, secondly, He substitutionally bore our sins in His own body on the Cross, and all those who place their faith and trust in Him, turning from their sins to receive Him as their personal Lord and Saviour, are saved from the wrath of God to come, are being saved from the working of sin in our own flesh in this life, and will be saved finally from every taint of sin in this life, following the physical resurrection of the body, and its being changed like unto His glorified body in the eternal presence of God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

    It is obvious from the Bible that OT saints were saved, having lived before God, as long as they lived according to the revelation God gave them in the Old Covenant, forshadowing the coming and final sacrifice of Christ. But since the Cross of Christ, God requires everyone, everywhere, to repent and to receive the Gospel of salvation in Christ.

    I admit, sometimes it is hard to believe that sin is so serious in the mind of God. But the Bible clearly teaches that it was so serious, it literally caused the fall of the entire human race, in Adam. I know many like Chuck Missler and many from your former Calvery Chapel denomination, try to turn the seriousness of sin into a more palatable view that the sons of God of Genesis 6, refers to a time when fallen angels co-mingled with the women of earth, to cause a corrupted blood line, which was the reason for God sending the flood. And I do know that some contexts do use the phrase beniy elohim that way, but there is an exception, and that is, Hosea 1:10:

    "Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God" (i.e. beniy el hi).

    So I don't hold to the teaching that bad bloodlines didn't cause the global flood, but bad faithlines was a strong enough reason for God to bring judgement. Likewise, I believe the Bible teaches that the final judgement will be like in the days of Noah, and I do not think that will be new mixtures of fallen angels and women. Nor do I believe that there is a differnce between fallen angels and demons as some teach, including Chuck Missler and Tom Horn, etc... that is, that the demons are the children of these angel women, so that when they die, because they are hybrids, they become demons in this world. Good luck with that teaching. And yes, I do appreciate much of the teaching of Chuck Missler, and to a lesser extent, Tom Horn, but I cannot buy into this Nephilim crazed sons of God teaching that has flooded the Evangelical Church. Add to that, their unbiblical Zionism, placing both Israel and the Church on parallel, but separate tracks in the endtimes, and I am afraid there might come a serious falling away from the faith as a result of all of this crazed teaching from many otherwise very brilliant and scholarly people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    Yes, of course I know that the Bible says that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. My point was that the Gospel is unjust because the sinners don't ever receive justice for their sins while other people, even the best amongst us, suffer forever for the "sin" of not believing a religious dogma. It makes no sense to me at all. If you would like to try to explain how that could be "just" that would be great.

    Richard
    But Jesus paid the ultimate price, He received God's justice, His wrath upon sin for all who place their faith and trust in Him. And that is open for the good, bad, and ugly. How many real evil people do you know that turn to Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour, and live a Spirit-filled, godly life? Not too many. So I believe you are making more out of this than even reality evidences. I have to believe with Abraham, "shall not the judge of the whole earth do what is right"? I can't enter into the mind of God, nor can you, even if you deny His existence. The thing that is amazing is how much non-believers fight against the existence of God, when they have absolutely no alternative to His Being sovereign Lord over all Creation, including laws and nature.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    And your assertion that salvation is offered to all makes no sense, given that most people who have ever lived never heard about it. How then can it be the standard by which God judges? And this brings up another fundamental incoherence in the Bible. Many passages teach that everyone will "render to every man according to his deeds" and everyone will be "judged according to their works." But that seems to directly contradict the message of salvation by faith. So which is it? Is God going to reward everyone "according to their works" or not?

    Richard
    I don't think I said that salvation is offered to all, and if I did I didn't mean that. It is obvious that half the world or more hasn't had the Gospel offered to them. I don't fully understand it, but I do believe the Bible teaches that salvation is a free gift offered through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ alone, to be received by faith alone, but even Christians will appear before the Judgement Seat of Christ to receive rewards for things done in this life. But at the end of time, following the resurrection, only those outside of Christ, those whose names are not written in the Lamb's Book of Life, will appear before the Final Judgement of God to receive what was done in this life. The Bible teaches that all OT saints, and all NT believers in Jesus Christ will not be part of that judgement where the books will be opened.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    And that's why I doubt the salvation of the vast majority of "evangelical" Christians, as represented, for example, by the millions of members of the Southern Baptist Convention and the millions of deluded people who flock to the likes of Benny Hinn, Todd Bentley, etc., etc., etc. If I judge by the "fruit" I see no reason to believe the Gospel. On the contrary, I have every reason to reject it, because it breeds in people a contempt for the truth and a delusional worldview. In general, the fruit is bad everywhere I look. Indeed, you see profound evil in the largest group of Christians on the planet, the Roman Catholic Church. This is how it has always been for all religions. They are more like political parties. Suni and Shiites kill each other, Catholics and Protestants kill each other. Hindus and Moslems. Religion is the root of much evil.

    Richard
    Richard, my standard of Christianity has to be the written Word of God. I am so thankful that I know many loving, genuine, truly biblical Christians, because there are many whose faith does not line up with the Word. I almost get dizzy in appalling shock when I think of men such as Todd Bentley, Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Haggin etc, etc, etc, ad-nauseum. But I know that so many others, and many more whose names are never known, have lived out exemplary Christian lives. Hinn, Copeland, Haggin, Bentley, and many others have taught outright heresies, and yet they claim to be prophets and apostles, when all the time they are full of such lies and deceit and willful deception. I am sure that God will judge them someday. But I refuse to let them dictate to me the clearer and purer teachings of Jesus Christ and His holy Apostles and Prophets.

    And yes, religion is the root of much evil, but I don't believe that Jesus Christ or true biblically solid Christians are guilty of such gross evil. By their fruit you will know them. But you must admit, much of what is going on in the world today, is done by atheists, including social engineers, war mongers, global bankers, intelligence agencies, secret societies aligning them with the religions of the world. Look at all the deaths by a Mao Tze Tung, a Pol Pot, an Adolf Hitler, a Lenin, Trotsky, or a Stalin. You can't tell me that was religions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    Are you really satisfied with that answer? What happened to God's "elect"? Are you saying people can get saved without God first choosing them?

    Richard
    I struggle with my faith like anyone who is a serious thinker and sensitive to the evil times. If God is God, He must be sovereign even by definition, so it is obvious that no one can be saved except God first choose him or her. But I say with Abraham, "shall not the Judge of the whole earth do what is right"? I have seen so many of the blessings of God. I see no alternative. What is your alternative?

    This was a good, but heavy dialogue Richard. I hope we both continue to grapple with the gravity of this subject, and we continue to strive for the truth.

    dp

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,614
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    Thanks for finding that post Gambini. Here is the correct link. And here's another quote from that post:
    Now the real miracle of the Bible Wheel shines with its greatest clarity when we examine the specific content on each Spoke in light of the Alphabetic KeyWords that God established in the Alphabetic Verses of Scripture. The Alphabetic Verses are the passages that God designed on the pattern of the Hebrew alphabet. The most notable example is Psalm 119 which has 8 stanzas for each letter giving a total of 176 (= 8 x 22) verses. And what is the theme of this, the largest chapter in God's Word? It is none other than the WORD itself! And how are words written? With the Alphabet, of course. We find therefore that God designed the PSALM of HIS WORD on the pattern of the Hebrew Alphabet, and this establishes the pattern for the large-scale pattern of His entire Word in the form of the Wheel. But there is more! There are many profound correlations between the Alphabet KeyWords and the specific content of the books on the corresponding Spokes.
    I then presented one of my favorite examples of the "profound correlations" - the connection between the symbolic meaning of Tzaddi (righteousness) and the content of Spoke 18.

    So let's evaluate the evidence. I asserted that the Alphabetic KeyWords used in the Alphabetic Verses establish "the large-scale pattern of His entire Word in the form of the Wheel." Is that statement true? Did I find sufficient evidence to support such a broad claim? That is the hypothesis that must be tested. In the post you quoted, I gave evidence only from one spoke relating to only one of the symbolic meanings of Tzaddi. So to evaluate the claim, we need to examine ALL THE DATA and see if it fits with my hypothesis. That's how science works.

    As it turns out, the answer is "no." The hypothesis is not true for most alphabetic keywords. There are very few places where we get connections as clear as what we see on Spoke 18. I searched for such connections for many years and the truth is that there are very few. Far too few to warrant any claim of deliberate design, especially from an almighty omniscient being who chose to create such a design. And worse, there is no way to know how many of the connections we do find would be expected by mere coincidence.

    <snip>

    I am in process of reviewing all my work to see how much was skewed by similar biases. It should prove very enlightening.

    Richard
    As I suspected, the review of my work has proven very enlightening. Disturbingly so. I was able to instantly debunk the four examples of Alphabetic KeyLinks that I have had posted on my site for over a decade (see posts #65, #66, #67, and #68), which I always considered to be some of the best evidence I had. I now am going to debunk the claims I made concerning Spoke 18 in the post that Gambini found on christian-forum.net (link). Those claims were based on my article about the connection between Tzaddi and the Book of Matthew on Spoke 18 called To Fulfill All Righteousness. I always thought that this was some of the most powerful evidence that God had designed the Bible in the form of the Wheel. Here is an extended quote from that post on christian-forum.net:

    One of the most obvious, and astounding examples, is seen on Spoke 18. The 18th letter is Tzaddi, and the primary Alphabetic KeyWords associated with it are based on the root "tzedek" meaning righteousness. God used words based on this root in many of the Alphabetic Verses corresponding to Tzaddi. For example (AV stands for Alphabetic Verse):

    • AV Ps 119:137 Righteous (Tzaddik) art thou, O LORD, and upright are thy judgments.
    • AV Ps 145:17 The LORD is righteous (tzaddik) in all his ways, and holy in all his works.
    • AV Lam 1:18 The LORD is righteous (tzaddik); for I have rebelled against his commandment.
    • AV Ps 112:9b ... His righteousness (tzedakah) endureth for ever;
    • AV Ps 119:142 Thy righteousness (tzedakah) is an everlasting righteousness.
    • AV Ps 119:144 The righteousness (tzedek) of thy testimonies is everlasting:

    This is the primary symbolic meaning of the 18th letter Tzaddi - righteousness.

    This theme dominates all three books on Spoke 18:

    • Job is a theodicy, an exploration of the righteousness of God in light of human suffering.
    • Matthew is the Gospel of Righteousness, as explained below.
    • 1 John - this book explicitly defines the meaning of righteousness, and is the only book to proclaim the title of our Lord as Jesus Christ the Righteous.

    Now one of the primary objections people raise is the charge of "cherry picking." They suggest that the Bible is such a big book that anyone can make connections with anything, and therefore nothing like the Bible Wheel could have any real meaning. But this is not true. God established the connections for us in the Alphabetic Verses, and the specific content of the books is an objective fact. Case in point: the frequency of the word "righteousness" is greatly maximized in Matthew relative to the other Gospels:



    I presented that graph as evidence against the charge of "cherry picking." The data is valid and it certainly looks convincing because it shows that righteousness really is maximized in Matthew relative to the other three Gospels. But that is deceptive. And ironically, it is itself a textbook example of cherry picking because it does not show all the data for the distribution of the words "righteous" and "righteousness" in the whole Bible. Here is the graph of all the data:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	matthew-righteousness-selection-bias.jpg 
Views:	56 
Size:	86.7 KB 
ID:	1251

    Obviously, the "theme of righteousness" is not "maximized in Matthew" except in relation to the other three Gospels. So though my statement was literally true, it was fundamentally deceptive. It is curious that it is maximized (relative to the other Gospels) on Spoke 18, but when we look at all the data we see no correlation between "righteousness" and the pattern of the Bible Wheel. This is the key to debunking claims that are based on selection bias. All you need to do is look at all the data.

    Once again, what I thought was some of the "best evidence" for my thesis that God designed the Bible in the form of the Wheel fails. There is no evidence of any design. I have now reviewed five of my "most powerful examples" and they all fail.

    I'm afraid I have justified a couple old adages. The first is: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." And the second is "You can make numbers confess to anything if you torture them long enough."

    <sigh>

    Richard

    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    4,313
    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    Hi Rose,

    I was wondering when you would enter this dialogue, welcome.

    I have to agree with every bit of what you say, in general. It is true specific commandments were given in the OT, regarding slavery, and yes, Jesus, obeying all aspects of the law, would have gone along with that, not to mention his NT teaching about slaves and masters.

    I do think that Paul, writing to Philemon, suggested it was a better thing to attain freedom over slavery, but until that was realised, slaves and masters should obey God in all aspects of their lives. Paul, the prisoner for his faith, wrote Philemon, the slave master, on behalf of his runaway slave, Onesimus, appealing for his mercy toward Onesimus. Consider Philemon 1:15-16:

    "For perhaps he therefore departed for a season, that thou shouldest receive him for ever; Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh, and in the Lord?"

    By suggesting, above a servant, even a beloved brother, and how much better it would be for Philemon, both in the flesh, and in the Lord, if he were to receive Onesimus once again.

    So, Rose, even though there are some admittedly difficult teachings in earlier time frames, I believe that this is another one of those examples where Christ was taking the internal Gospel message well beyond the external limitations of the law of Moses. I am not saying the Law was not internal, it clearly was, but we do know that Jesus Christ brought in a New Covenant, built on better promises, and I think that is hinted at here. That is why most of the legal actions to do away with slavery were initiated by Christians, not atheists.
    Thank you for the welcome Dpenn ...

    The huge problem is that it was the Biblegod who gave the Old Covenant, so why should a New Covenant be necessary unless the old was flawed? Why did the Biblegod allow slavery in the first place, when we know how much he hated it when the Hebrews were enslaved to the Egyptians? There is no sound reason why the Biblegod could not have ordained a law forbidding slavery, he didn't have a problem ordaining the new tradition of circumcision, or requiring a day of rest on the Sabbath, both things that had never been done before ... along with all the other 613 laws that the Hebrews had to follow.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    Further, Jesus and Paul had as much to say to masters as they did to slaves, as we are all to give an account of our lives to God. Ephesians not only addresses husband-wife, children-parent, but also master-slave relationships. I am sure you are aware of the following Ephesians 6:5-9:

    "Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men: Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free. And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him."

    I think you can see that this is a balanced approach to both masters and slaves, not the type of slavery we are familiar with. That would be good advice for employer-employee relations today (of course I don't mean this should be enforced in the workplace, I merely mean it is a balanced approach to both sides).
    There would be no need of that "balanced approach" if all forms of human ownership had been forbidden under the law from the beginning. If all people were treated with equal human rights, all the laws governing masters and slaves would be unnecessary. As I have said before, no matter how well a master treats his slave it is still a violation of a persons human rights to be "owned" by another person, and nowhere in the entire Bible is slavery condemned.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    In any event, I am at least appreciative of the fact that you admit that the type of "chattel slavery" practised by the African slave trade was foreign to the teaching of Moses, and commanded by God. There were even inheritance rights. Please do not think that I am in favour of slavery. I merely recognise that this was a period in history that was quite far removed from where we are today, including multiple wives, and marrying of near relatives. And I also thank you for acknowledging that George Whitefield, clearly preached against the evils of slavery in the South. Many people will not admit that, and continue to malign genuine biblical Christianity for all the evils of slavery.
    I agree that Jesus probably would have condemned abusive slavery, but I don't necessarily think that is the case with the teachings of Moses. In Exo.21 the law states that the only restriction on beating a slave is that you can't beat him to death ... now that's pretty bad!

    Yes, the biblical time period is very far removed from our values and morals today, but the Biblegod is supposed to be the same yesterday, today and forever. So, why did the Biblegod give laws that violated the human rights of women and slaves? If slavery is morally wrong today, then it was equally wrong in biblical times.

    Also, just because Christians like George Whitefield preached against slavery in no wise means that Christianity taught against slavery, because it didn't ... the Bible does not teach that slavery is wrong, it condones it.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    What do you think is the alternative? How do you determine right from wrong? How do you determine absolutes? I know we all have a moral code in us, but I think even that is a clear indication that God has somehow written His law in our inner being, and our conscious can only accuse or excuse us in our actions and thoughts.
    It is very easy to determine right from wrong when it comes to the treatment of people. All people are equally human and as such are entitled to equal human rights. If I do something to you that violates your human rights that is morally wrong, the same goes for all the laws in the Bible that violate peoples human rights ... they are morally wrong. The Bible does not teach right from wrong it only teaches obedience to a god who demands worship.


    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    I am sure that you know what the Bible says in Romans 1:18-23:

    "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things."

    I think that without God, all that evolution can ever offer us is "an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things."

    I can only hope this softens your heart a little bit toward the God of the Bible,

    dp
    It's funny that you should say all evolution has to offer is "an image made like unto corruptible man" when it is the Bible that introduces the idea of man being corrupt. I don't believe there is anything innately corrupt about humans, granted people do bad things, but that has nothing to do with being born corrupt. The theory of evolution offers us an explanation of the diversity of life, not how life began.

    One of the main reasons I do not believe the Biblegod is a true god is because of the horrendous manner in which the laws attributed to him violate the basic human rights of women and slaves ... this is a sure sign that he was created in the minds of biased primitive men who thought of themselves as superior.

    Kind regards,
    Rose
    Never trust anything you are afraid to question ~

    To know oneself is to know the universe...


    Live Fully...Love Extravagantly...For the sake of Goodness

    Be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves. Matt.10:16

    Come let us reason together...Isa.1:18
    ********************************
    My new Blog site: God and Butterfly

  5. #85
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    287
    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    The huge problem is that it was the Biblegod who gave the Old Covenant, so why should a New Covenant be necessary unless the old was flawed? Why did the Biblegod allow slavery in the first place, when we know how much he hated it when the Hebrews were enslaved to the Egyptians? There is no sound reason why the Biblegod could not have ordained a law forbidding slavery, he didn't have a problem ordaining the new tradition of circumcision, or requiring a day of rest on the Sabbath, both things that had never been done before ... along with all the other 613 laws that the Hebrews had to follow.

    Rose
    Rose,

    I will never be able to answer all of your questions adequately. But there are a few comments I can make regarding your blog. For reasons I don't know, but the Bible explains, God chose to work out salvation over a long period of time, including an Old Covenant of shadows and types, all in preparation of a New Covenant complete in Christ. Galatians uses an allegory of a school master leading us to maturity, and Hebrews speaks of a better Covenant built upon better promises. This means that the Old was good, but the new is better. And Moses was the administrator of the Old, whereas, Jesus, the Son of God, the Lord of the New. I don't know why God chose to use animal sacrifices, typifying the coming of the final perfect sacrifice of His Son. We maybe don't like it too much, but can you imagine what sacrifice the Son of God made, to come down from all eternity to be born as a boy, to be fully human, yet fully divine? Can you imagine what kind of love would allow Him to bear the sins and guilt and penalty of all those who will place their faith and trust in Him?

    I don't know why God didn't design a law forbidding slavery, but I do know that He forbid His people to allow their children to pass through the fire, or to be caught up in all sorts of sexual immorality, or to be caught up in all the false worship of the gods that sanctioned all of these things. Many of them were very evil in their ways, and maybe that is why he endorsed slavery, as an only way to deal with a people given over to gross sins. We seem to be moving that way in our societies today, so maybe we will get to experience, like them, just what the results can become, of gross sin permeating all of society. And by the way, God was placing guidelines on slavery, whereas the heathen nations were all practising brutal forms of slavery as well. Much of the radical Muslim world today still practices horrendous forms of slavery.

    Maybe it was much like divorce, Jesus said that God allowed it in Moses' day, but from the beginning it was not so. It was always intended that a man and woman would be joined to one another for life. That was the ideal, but God knowing the hardness of their hearts, permitted Moses to allow for a written divorce, but again with guidelines. Not all things were clarified in the Bible, so maybe it was something like that, a reluctant, necessary permission. I don't know, and I don't think anyone else knows for sure. I live my life in the light of the Gospel of Christ, under a New and better Covenant, built on better promises, and I have found God to be loving, faithful, merciful, forgiving, gracious, and kind to all who submit to His Sovereign Lordship, in all things.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    There would be no need of that "balanced approach" if all forms of human ownership had been forbidden under the law from the beginning. If all people were treated with equal human rights, all the laws governing masters and slaves would be unnecessary. As I have said before, no matter how well a master treats his slave it is still a violation of a persons human rights to be "owned" by another person, and nowhere in the entire Bible is slavery condemned.

    Rose
    That would have been a nice dream, but that doesn't answer for Adam plunging the human race into a fallen state due to his sinful disobedience in the Garden of Eden. We could all wish that didn't happen, or in your case, probably deny it ever happened, but the Bible states clearly that as the reason for sin being a part of our existence in the first place. And how much we hate this mess at times, there has been a way provided to be delivered from it all and in time, to receive perfected immortal, glorified bodies to live in the gracious presence of God for all eternity. I personally know I can trust God because He has never failed me yet, even though I have failed Him more times than I care to say. I am truly sorry if that is not your experience, but I believe it to be true non the less. And as I said in my earlier blog, I think Paul was already laying the groundwork for brotherly love rising above and replacing slavery. You may choose to reject that, but you can't reject what he clearly said on behalf of Onesimus, the slave whom he went to bat for.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    I agree that Jesus probably would have condemned abusive slavery, but I don't necessarily think that is the case with the teachings of Moses. In Exo.21 the law states that the only restriction on beating a slave is that you can't beat him to death ... now that's pretty bad!

    Rose
    There are a number of things in the OT that I find harsh, and I could wish they were different. One thing is clear though, and that is the whole world was doing the same, not just the people of God under Moses. And theirs truly was appalling and ruthless. As I said, maybe this was something like God's permitting divorce, as stated by Christ, but yet giving Moses clear guidelines for its practise if hardness of heart prevailed. I really can say no more regarding that, just that I find no alternative in their day and age anywhere in the writings of history.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    Yes, the biblical time period is very far removed from our values and morals today, but the Biblegod is supposed to be the same yesterday, today and forever. So, why did the Biblegod give laws that violated the human rights of women and slaves? If slavery is morally wrong today, then it was equally wrong in biblical times.

    Rose
    Well, it might be that they needed to mature in the allowance of the slavery of their day, whereas there are many other things we need to mature in, for example, abortion. To me, that is far more offensive morally than slavery, since it does not even allow an unborn child the right to live. I heard a recent figure this week, that it is estimated that there have been 53 million abortions in the US since Roe v Wade in 1973. I don't believe abortion is the unforgiveable sin, and I genuinely feel sorry for many women that have become trapped in a situation they really didn't want. But for the child, it is life and death. And the Hebrews passage that says Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever, remains true to His immutable, eternal, Being, and it is a relief to know He even more true than the very laws of science or nature, because, as the pre-incarnate Son of God, Colossians, and Hebrews say that He is the Creator of all things, visible, and invisible, and by Him, all thinks consist. So whatever I don't understand from the Word, I trust that He will help me to understand, or give me the grace to persevere in faith, believing that all things work together for the good for those who love God and are called according to His purpose.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    Also, just because Christians like George Whitefield preached against slavery in no wise means that Christianity taught against slavery, because it didn't ... the Bible does not teach that slavery is wrong, it condones it.

    Rose
    I think this was covered in my discussion of Philemon, even if it is not adequate for your liking.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    It is very easy to determine right from wrong when it comes to the treatment of people. All people are equally human and as such are entitled to equal human rights. If I do something to you that violates your human rights that is morally wrong, the same goes for all the laws in the Bible that violate peoples human rights ... they are morally wrong. The Bible does not teach right from wrong it only teaches obedience to a god who demands worship.

    Rose
    You may think this is so obvious, but we have a world that operates as if that is not true. Just look around you in this world, and tell me where this is true. I know that Jesus told us to love one another, and even our enemies. In the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7, he taught not only the Beatitudes, which no human being could truly live out without His grace and power, but showed how the Oral Traditions of the Jews had corrupted the real meaning of the Law of God. Of course, this didn't end there, because since this time God's Word has fallen prey to even more Talmudic and Kabbalistic twisting of its truth, till it is almost unrecognisable. Of course the Bible teaches right from wrong, not only in the OT, but that is the teaching of the NT from one end to the other, but yes, it does command us in the ways of spiritual worship of God, and the benefits therein.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    It's funny that you should say all evolution has to offer is "an image made like unto corruptible man" when it is the Bible that introduces the idea of man being corrupt. I don't believe there is anything innately corrupt about humans, granted people do bad things, but that has nothing to do with being born corrupt. The theory of evolution offers us an explanation of the diversity of life, not how life began.

    Rose
    I don't know how anyone could even dream that man is not corrupt. I think if you really consider this one, you will have to admit that people do bad things because they have a corrupt nature. Otherwise that would be impossible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    One of the main reasons I do not believe the Biblegod is a true god is because of the horrendous manner in which the laws attributed to him violate the basic human rights of women and slaves ... this is a sure sign that he was created in the minds of biased primitive men who thought of themselves as superior.

    Rose
    Well I have tried to give my response to the slavery issue. Being a man, I am not as equipped as I would like to tackle the women's issues you think are so bad. It is obvious that God ordained that man would be the head of the home, but the Bible speaks in many places where the woman rose above the man in numerous situations. You are probably aware that in the Garden of Eden, it was recorded that Eve was the first to eat of the forbidden fruit, and she then gave to Adam, and he ate too. But it wasn't Eve that plunged the world into sin, it was Adam, because he was ordained to be the representative before God of the whole human race. That is why Romans 5 can say, in Adam all die, but in Christ, all are made alive. And although you intimate that women are abused, the women that followed after, and served Christ, in His days on earth, seemed to love Him every bit as much as the men did. Sure a wife is to submit to her husband, but a husband is also to love his wife as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself up for it. I don't know who has the tougher job. I simply think we are all adequately equipped and designed to enjoy the roles that God has ordained for us.

    I hope this isn't too cliche an answer for you. I have to confess this is a bit of a joke here on my part, as I am a single man and have never been married, so you might rightly say, what do you know, and you know what? you might be right.

    Anyways, Rose, like Richard, it is obvious you both have a real case against God, and I am not going to pass judgement on that. I am not God. But I do know that you really believe that these issues place a blemish on the character of the God of the Bible. So for now, I am just glad that we were able to speak our minds on a truly important subject. Thanks for the dialogue.

    dp

  6. #86
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    4,313
    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    Rose,

    I don't know why God didn't design a law forbidding slavery, but I do know that He forbid His people to allow their children to pass through the fire, or to be caught up in all sorts of sexual immorality, or to be caught up in all the false worship of the gods that sanctioned all of these things. Many of them were very evil in their ways, and maybe that is why he endorsed slavery, as an only way to deal with a people given over to gross sins. We seem to be moving that way in our societies today, so maybe we will get to experience, like them, just what the results can become, of gross sin permeating all of society. And by the way, God was placing guidelines on slavery, whereas the heathen nations were all practising brutal forms of slavery as well. Much of the radical Muslim world today still practices horrendous forms of slavery.
    Hello Dpenn,

    Haven't you ever wondered why the Biblegod couldn't give a law forbidding slavery, yet he could command the Hebrew soldiers to go and slaughter every man, woman and child or allow the soldiers to keep the virgin women alive and take them as captive wives? The gross immoralities that the Biblegod commanded the Hebrew soldiers to do is ever bit as horrendous as any of the actions the pagan societies were participating in.


    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    Maybe it was much like divorce, Jesus said that God allowed it in Moses' day, but from the beginning it was not so. It was always intended that a man and woman would be joined to one another for life. That was the ideal, but God knowing the hardness of their hearts, permitted Moses to allow for a written divorce, but again with guidelines. Not all things were clarified in the Bible, so maybe it was something like that, a reluctant, necessary permission. I don't know, and I don't think anyone else knows for sure. I live my life in the light of the Gospel of Christ, under a New and better Covenant, built on better promises, and I have found God to be loving, faithful, merciful, forgiving, gracious, and kind to all who submit to His Sovereign Lordship, in all things.
    Again, have you ever wondered why the Biblegod would permit men to divorce, yet not allow women the same privileged? If divorce was allowed because men's hearts were hard, wouldn't treating women with kindness and equality be a better approach than allowing men to rule over women and abuse them with their power?



    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    There are a number of things in the OT that I find harsh, and I could wish they were different. One thing is clear though, and that is the whole world was doing the same, not just the people of God under Moses. And theirs truly was appalling and ruthless. As I said, maybe this was something like God's permitting divorce, as stated by Christ, but yet giving Moses clear guidelines for its practise if hardness of heart prevailed. I really can say no more regarding that, just that I find no alternative in their day and age anywhere in the writings of history.
    Is it ever an acceptable excuse to allow bad actions because others are doing the same? I think not ... especially when it is a supposed god who is doing the allowing. Whether or not there were alternatives manifest in the world did not stop the Biblegod from imposing many unique doctrines upon the Hebrew people. Would you ever allow your child to beat up another kid because he didn't know any better? I hope not.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    Well, it might be that they needed to mature in the allowance of the slavery of their day, whereas there are many other things we need to mature in, for example, abortion. To me, that is far more offensive morally than slavery, since it does not even allow an unborn child the right to live. I heard a recent figure this week, that it is estimated that there have been 53 million abortions in the US since Roe v Wade in 1973. I don't believe abortion is the unforgiveable sin, and I genuinely feel sorry for many women that have become trapped in a situation they really didn't want. But for the child, it is life and death. And the Hebrews passage that says Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever, remains true to His immutable, eternal, Being, and it is a relief to know He even more true than the very laws of science or nature, because, as the pre-incarnate Son of God, Colossians, and Hebrews say that He is the Creator of all things, visible, and invisible, and by Him, all thinks consist. So whatever I don't understand from the Word, I trust that He will help me to understand, or give me the grace to persevere in faith, believing that all things work together for the good for those who love God and are called according to His purpose.
    Like I said before, it is never acceptable to allow wrong behavior even if the perpetrators are to immature to know better. It seems to be a consistent justification for Christians to use the tired excuse of god allowing people to do bad thing because they didn't know any better.


    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    Well I have tried to give my response to the slavery issue. Being a man, I am not as equipped as I would like to tackle the women's issues you think are so bad. It is obvious that God ordained that man would be the head of the home, but the Bible speaks in many places where the woman rose above the man in numerous situations. You are probably aware that in the Garden of Eden, it was recorded that Eve was the first to eat of the forbidden fruit, and she then gave to Adam, and he ate too. But it wasn't Eve that plunged the world into sin, it was Adam, because he was ordained to be the representative before God of the whole human race. That is why Romans 5 can say, in Adam all die, but in Christ, all are made alive. And although you intimate that women are abused, the women that followed after, and served Christ, in His days on earth, seemed to love Him every bit as much as the men did. Sure a wife is to submit to her husband, but a husband is also to love his wife as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself up for it. I don't know who has the tougher job. I simply think we are all adequately equipped and designed to enjoy the roles that God has ordained for us.

    I hope this isn't too cliche an answer for you. I have to confess this is a bit of a joke here on my part, as I am a single man and have never been married, so you might rightly say, what do you know, and you know what? you might be right.
    One doesn't have to be a woman to see the extreme male-bias that is rampant throughout Scripture ... I wrote a long article on my blog titled Gender Bias in the Bible, which you might be interested in reading to get you up to speed on all the unjust and biased treatment of women in the Bible.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    Anyways, Rose, like Richard, it is obvious you both have a real case against God, and I am not going to pass judgement on that. I am not God. But I do know that you really believe that these issues place a blemish on the character of the God of the Bible. So for now, I am just glad that we were able to speak our minds on a truly important subject. Thanks for the dialogue.

    dp
    I appreciate your willingness to speak rationally about these important issues. What matters most to me is treating people with equality and kindness ... this is something that I find sorely lacking in the Bible. For the most part I do not find that the Biblegod acts with kindness and this to me is extremely troubling. No matter how hard a persons heart is, kindness is always the best tool to break through, but that is not the method used by the Biblegod. If I can view the actions of the Biblegod's unkindness from a higher moral level, where do my morals come from?

    These are just a few of the reasons why I believe that the Biblegod was made up in the minds of men, who created him after their own image and likeness.

    Kind regards,
    Rose
    Never trust anything you are afraid to question ~

    To know oneself is to know the universe...


    Live Fully...Love Extravagantly...For the sake of Goodness

    Be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves. Matt.10:16

    Come let us reason together...Isa.1:18
    ********************************
    My new Blog site: God and Butterfly

  7. #87
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    287
    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    I appreciate your willingness to speak rationally about these important issues. What matters most to me is treating people with equality and kindness ... this is something that I find sorely lacking in the Bible. For the most part I do not find that the Biblegod acts with kindness and this to me is extremely troubling. No matter how hard a persons heart is, kindness is always the best tool to break through, but that is not the method used by the Biblegod. If I can view the actions of the Biblegod's unkindness from a higher moral level, where do my morals come from?

    These are just a few of the reasons why I believe that the Biblegod was made up in the minds of men, who created him after their own image and likeness.

    Kind regards,
    Rose
    Rose,

    Most of my responses have been to you and Richard, and we have had some very open discussions regarding what we believe and why. And I have already responded to most of your blog earlier. So I am merely going to try and take this in a slightly different direction. I have repeatedly asked, what is the alternative? As a matter of fact that was my first question when I signed up as a member on this blogsite.

    If Christianity is just another religion made up in the minds of men, then why was He hated so much by the ruling religious leaders of His day? The Bible tells you why. And why were the Christians hated and persecuted so much, not just in the early Church, but down through the ages, including the atrocities of the Roman Catholic Church in the Inquisition, past and present. The Bible tells you why. I am not talking about pseudo-Christians from the lunatic fringe, pseudo-prophet and pseudo-apostles like Todd Bentley, or Benny Hinn, or Kenneth Copeland, or Kenneth Haggin, or bla, bla, bla. I am talking about some of the most loving and caring Christians down through the ages, who have advanced all kinds of scientific and social benefits in this world, who live according to the biblical model of the beatitudes and sermon on the mount of Matthew 5-7? Hey, do you want to see the most insane version of the lunatic fringe today? Just go on Kim Clement's website and watch a few of his video clips. He makes these other nut jobs look like choir boys (and just for you, choir girls, in the likes of Joyce Meyer and Beth Ross). And it is obvious that all of his staged fulfilled prophecies are merely a sick and useful tool of a Jewish/Zionistic/Vaticano Globalist launch of the most evil NWO imaginable. But as evil as I think these people are, and even though I do believe many of them are deluded and deceived, many are obviously knowing charlatans, I simply know they are false teachers, preachers, prophets, and apostles. How do I know that? The Bible tells me so. There are just too many other good Bible teachers and leaders, and lowly servants, that live out the solid Gospel message throughout their lives, and also over the course of history.

    Atheistic evolutionism falls in flames to the ground, unable to answer for all of the amazingly designed features of life. There has never been a scientific answer for how life could arise from non-life, add to that the wonders of mathematics, logic, moral consciousness, beauty, information, emotional interaction, senses, etc, etc, etc. Oh sure, they can steal God's creation and mess with it, like cloning, or DNA manipulation, or brag about how their pseudo-science can answer all of known reality. But usually they have to resort to lies and deceptions in the fossil record, or force professing Christians, or even simply Intelligent Design adherents out of centers of higher learning. Van Til aptly described the delusion of the humanist mind, when he likened them to a child that has grown enough, so that sitting on his or her father's lap, has finally matured enough to reach up and slap that father in the face. I don't mean this to be condescending or disrespectful Rose, but keeping with this analogy, Whose face have you and Richard been slapping lately?

    Do you really think that humanism has the answer? Can you trust the social engineer of our day? What about a Ray Kurzweil who thinks we are on the brink of a singularity that will see humans merge with machines, and usher in eternal life. Or when asked, do you believe there is a God, answers, not yet. Just watch the u-tube version of his documentary "Transcendent Man". It is one of the most pitiable and sad things I have ever observed. What about all the Globalists who write openly about eliminating 7 billion people in order for their NWO to succeed? These are not dim-witted religious people, these are your Fabian Socialists, your humanists for a better tomorrow. If not the standard of the Bible, by what Standard would you suggest we live and move and have our being? You might have a nice dream world for your inner clique of friends, and don't think I am saying there is anything wrong with that. But how can a humanist choose right from wrong? We have tried this over and over, and it always ends miserably, and with massive bloodshed, the type of bloodshed you despise.

    These modern day Socialists, these great planners for a better tomorrow, fully intend on using their new Genetic, Robotic, Artificial Intelligence, and Nano Technologies on a lesser humanity. If this were simply used to enhance life, in all of its vast spectrum, that would be wonderful. But they are messing with DNA, splicing animal, plant, and human genetic information. They don't have a clue where they are going with this. But God be damned, they insist on doing it, and don't dare try to stop them. If you aren't up to date on what is going on here, just google Chuck Missler and Tom Horn's 2 part presentation of this at a 2011 Conference, seen here: (https://archive.org/details/Transhum...AgeOfTheHybrid).

    I am simply not ready to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Christianity has given us many wonders to behold, and great hope on into the future, and beyond, into eternity. You always seem to ignore that God so loved the world, and gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life. I can only hope that you someday see that you do not have a real answer to this. And in saying that I certainly am not suggesting that nihilism is a true philosophical position after all. It might be an option, but it is far from the truth. Our hearts demand it, logic demands it, human intelligence demands it, and I believe God reveals it, and the Bible proclaims it.

    I hope I am not coming across as too forceful with this. I am merely trying to suggest that the alternative does not exist. You might wish there were an alternative, but I don't think you have a real working alternative, one that encompasses truth and reality.

    dp
    Last edited by dpenn; 09-01-2014 at 11:29 AM.

  8. #88
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    4,313
    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    Rose,

    Most of my responses have been to you and Richard, and we have had some very open discussions regarding what we believe and why. And I have already responded to most of your blog earlier. So I am merely going to try and take this in a slightly different direction. I have repeatedly asked, what is the alternative? As a matter of fact that was my first question when I signed up as a member on this blogsite.
    Hello Dpenn

    Does there need to be an alternative to the Bible? I don't think so ... unless you want to consider the scientific method as an alternative.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    If Christianity is just another religion made up in the minds of men, then why was He hated so much by the ruling religious leaders of His day? The Bible tells you why. And why were the Christians hated and persecuted so much, not just in the early Church, but down through the ages, including the atrocities of the Roman Catholic Church in the Inquisition, past and present. The Bible tells you why. I am not talking about pseudo-Christians from the lunatic fringe, pseudo-prophet and pseudo-apostles like Todd Bentley, or Benny Hinn, or Kenneth Copeland, or Kenneth Haggin, or bla, bla, bla. I am talking about some of the most loving and caring Christians down through the ages, who have advanced all kinds of scientific and social benefits in this world, who live according to the biblical model of the beatitudes and sermon on the mount of Matthew 5-7? Hey, do you want to see the most insane version of the lunatic fringe today? Just go on Kim Clement's website and watch a few of his video clips. He makes these other nut jobs look like choir boys (and just for you, choir girls, in the likes of Joyce Meyer and Beth Ross). And it is obvious that all of his staged fulfilled prophecies are merely a sick and useful tool of a Jewish/Zionistic/Vaticano Globalist launch of the most evil NWO imaginable. But as evil as I think these people are, and even though I do believe many of them are deluded and deceived, many are obviously knowing charlatans, I simply know they are false teachers, preachers, prophets, and apostles. How do I know that? The Bible tells me so. There are just too many other good Bible teachers and leaders, and lowly servants, that live out the solid Gospel message throughout their lives, and also over the course of history.
    Jesus was no more hated than any other religious leader, or for that matter he was no more hated than the recipients of Christian hatred during the Crusades and Inquisition. People have been hating on each other since time immemorial.


    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    Atheistic evolutionism falls in flames to the ground, unable to answer for all of the amazingly designed features of life. There has never been a scientific answer for how life could arise from non-life, add to that the wonders of mathematics, logic, moral consciousness, beauty, information, emotional interaction, senses, etc, etc, etc. Oh sure, they can steal God's creation and mess with it, like cloning, or DNA manipulation, or brag about how their pseudo-science can answer all of known reality. But usually they have to resort to lies and deceptions in the fossil record, or force professing Christians, or even simply Intelligent Design adherents out of centers of higher learning. Van Til aptly described the delusion of the humanist mind, when he likened them to a child that has grown enough, so that sitting on his or her father's lap, has finally matured enough to reach up and slap that father in the face. I don't mean this to be condescending or disrespectful Rose, but keeping with this analogy, Whose face have you and Richard been slapping lately?
    Of course all the questions have not been answered yet, evolution is a very young science, but considering its age, the questions it has answered have been astounding. The progress that has been made in the field of genetics is amazing and just think DNA was only discovered around 60 years ago!

    The problem with the Bible's explanation of creation, is that it is frozen in a primitive time period when scientific knowledge was not yet available ... and the beauty of science is that it is a fluid field that can change with evidence and knowledge, it is not locked-in to a specific doctrine given by a primitive man-made deity.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    Do you really think that humanism has the answer? Can you trust the social engineer of our day? What about a Ray Kurzweil who thinks we are on the brink of a singularity that will see humans merge with machines, and usher in eternal life. Or when asked, do you believe there is a God, answers, not yet. Just watch the u-tube version of his documentary "Transcendent Man". It is one of the most pitiable and sad things I have ever observed. What about all the Globalists who write openly about eliminating 7 billion people in order for their NWO to succeed? These are not dim-witted religious people, these are your Fabian Socialists, your humanists for a better tomorrow. If not the standard of the Bible, by what Standard would you suggest we live and move and have our being? You might have a nice dream world for your inner clique of friends, and don't think I am saying there is anything wrong with that. But how can a humanist choose right from wrong? We have tried this over and over, and it always ends miserably, and with massive bloodshed, the type of bloodshed you despise.
    Humanism is not meant to be an answer, it just describes the natural way things are. Just because the primitive men who wrote the Bible needed a god to explain all the unknowns, does not mean their god exists. A god like the Biblegod is not necessary to explain the workings of the universe, even though there could be some intelligent force behind the universe. The Biblegod is primitive and barbaric and clearly represents the mindset of superstitious men ... if anything, the Biblegod detracts from the magnificence and awesomeness of the universe, with his bloody slaughterings presented as the solution to all of humanities problems.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    I am simply not ready to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Christianity has given us many wonders to behold, and great hope on into the future, and beyond, into eternity. You always seem to ignore that God so loved the world, and gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life. I can only hope that you someday see that you do not have a real answer to this. And in saying that I certainly am not suggesting that nihilism is a true philosophical position after all. It might be an option, but it is far from the truth. Our hearts demand it, logic demands it, human intelligence demands it, and I believe God reveals it, and the Bible proclaims it.

    I hope I am not coming across as too forceful with this. I am merely trying to suggest that the alternative does not exist. You might wish there were an alternative, but I don't think you have a real working alternative, one that encompasses truth and reality.

    dp
    No worries about throwing out the baby with the bathwater, because there ain't no baby in there. It is clear after much searching and filtering the murky waste filled water of the Bible, there is no baby to be found.

    I am happy that you are openly sharing your opinions, so there is no worries about being to forceful ... please continue ...

    Once again, just because the Bible is shown to be a creation of the minds of primitive men does not mean there needs to be an alternative ... just keep an open mind.


    Kind regards,
    Rose
    Never trust anything you are afraid to question ~

    To know oneself is to know the universe...


    Live Fully...Love Extravagantly...For the sake of Goodness

    Be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves. Matt.10:16

    Come let us reason together...Isa.1:18
    ********************************
    My new Blog site: God and Butterfly

  9. #89
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,614
    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    Rose,

    Most of my responses have been to you and Richard, and we have had some very open discussions regarding what we believe and why. And I have already responded to most of your blog earlier. So I am merely going to try and take this in a slightly different direction. I have repeatedly asked, what is the alternative? As a matter of fact that was my first question when I signed up as a member on this blogsite.
    What is the alternative? Science.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    If Christianity is just another religion made up in the minds of men, then why was He hated so much by the ruling religious leaders of His day?
    Why was Joseph Smith hated? Why was Muhammad hated? It seems to be a common theme in religious cults.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    The Bible tells you why. And why were the Christians hated and persecuted so much, not just in the early Church, but down through the ages, including the atrocities of the Roman Catholic Church in the Inquisition, past and present. The Bible tells you why. I am not talking about pseudo-Christians from the lunatic fringe, pseudo-prophet and pseudo-apostles like Todd Bentley, or Benny Hinn, or Kenneth Copeland, or Kenneth Haggin, or bla, bla, bla. I am talking about some of the most loving and caring Christians down through the ages, who have advanced all kinds of scientific and social benefits in this world, who live according to the biblical model of the beatitudes and sermon on the mount of Matthew 5-7?
    I have no idea what you are talking about. The Pope is called "Papa" and is loved and revered by over a billion Catholics throughout the world, and many Protests and secular leaders respect him too.

    The real question is why religious people hate atheists so much. They lie about us. They are brainwashed to believe that atheists are immoral selfish degenerates. And when religious rulers had the power, they could murder atheists (and other "heretics") at will, in public.

    It seems to me that you have a very biased view in favor of your own religion.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    Hey, do you want to see the most insane version of the lunatic fringe today? Just go on Kim Clement's website and watch a few of his video clips. He makes these other nut jobs look like choir boys (and just for you, choir girls, in the likes of Joyce Meyer and Beth Ross). And it is obvious that all of his staged fulfilled prophecies are merely a sick and useful tool of a Jewish/Zionistic/Vaticano Globalist launch of the most evil NWO imaginable.
    Well now ... that's interesting. To my eyes, your theory about "Jewish/Zionistic/Vaticano Gloablist NWO" sounds at least as crazy as anything Kim Clement has to say. Please take no offense, as none is intended. I'm just trying to let you know what your ideas look like "from the outside."

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    But as evil as I think these people are, and even though I do believe many of them are deluded and deceived, many are obviously knowing charlatans, I simply know they are false teachers, preachers, prophets, and apostles. How do I know that? The Bible tells me so. There are just too many other good Bible teachers and leaders, and lowly servants, that live out the solid Gospel message throughout their lives, and also over the course of history.
    No one needs the Bible to know that those people are deluded, deceived, and/or knowing charlatans. And the truth is, all their followers believe themselves to also be devoted Bible believers, so "believing the Bible" does not help free people from delusion, but rather enslaves them to it.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    Atheistic evolutionism falls in flames to the ground, unable to answer for all of the amazingly designed features of life.
    I'm sorry, but your assertion strikes me as absurd and based fundamentally on a complete ignorance of the relevant science.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    There has never been a scientific answer for how life could arise from non-life,
    So what? Science is very young. We discovered DNA less than a hundred years ago. And religious superstitions obviously supply no answers! They teach blatant falsehoods, like the idea that the earth was created a mere 6000 years ago, etc.


    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    add to that the wonders of mathematics, logic, moral consciousness, beauty, information, emotional interaction, senses, etc, etc, etc.
    The idea of "God" does nothing to explain those ideas. Logic is an articulation of reality. Animals show signs of moral consciousness. None of those ideas give any reason to believe in a god.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    Oh sure, they can steal God's creation and mess with it, like cloning, or DNA manipulation, or brag about how their pseudo-science can answer all of known reality.
    So now you are calling real science "pseudo?" That makes no sense at all. It sounds delusional to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    But usually they have to resort to lies and deceptions in the fossil record, or force professing Christians, or even simply Intelligent Design adherents out of centers of higher learning.
    Those are the kinds of lies typically spewed out by demonstrably corrupt creationists. I had no idea you had let yourself be so deceived by them.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    Van Til aptly described the delusion of the humanist mind, when he likened them to a child that has grown enough, so that sitting on his or her father's lap, has finally matured enough to reach up and slap that father in the face. I don't mean this to be condescending or disrespectful Rose, but keeping with this analogy, Whose face have you and Richard been slapping lately?
    That is an absurd analogy. There is no evidence of any kind that there is a "Fatherly God" who has taught anyone anything. On the contrary, your "God" delighted in letting his followers die horrible deaths even as they begged him for healing. Ignorant humans had to learn science on their own, and when we did, we developed medicines that now heal millions of people that God would have let die. Van Til's analogy makes sense only to those are so deluded as to believe there really is a "Loving Father God" despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    Do you really think that humanism has the answer?
    I don't know what you think "humanism" means, so I can't answer. But I can say that humans are obviously on our own. When people had no choice but to "trust in God" we died like flies. Now we can use our evolved brains to free ourselves from the religious delusions that kept us in death and bondage for thousands of years.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    I am simply not ready to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Christianity has given us many wonders to behold, and great hope on into the future, and beyond, into eternity. You always seem to ignore that God so loved the world, and gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life.
    I'm sorry, but it's a little difficult to see the "love" in the Gospel that preaches eternal suffering and/or death to everyone outside your cult.

    Quote Originally Posted by dpenn View Post
    I hope I am not coming across as too forceful with this. I am merely trying to suggest that the alternative does not exist. You might wish there were an alternative, but I don't think you have a real working alternative, one that encompasses truth and reality.

    dp
    No worries my friend. Conversation is best when people lay their cards on the table. Case in point: the things you claim are "truth and reality" look like wild delusions to me. To compound that with your assertion that there is "no alternative" to such unfounded beliefs really puts it over the top of "crazy." I trust you will not think I am being "too forceful" with this. It's just what I honestly believe.

    Great chatting!

    Richard



    As for your idea that there is no "alternative" -
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  10. #90
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Daytona
    Posts
    1,855
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    What is the alternative? Science.

    Why was Joseph Smith hated? Why was Muhammad hated? It seems to be a common theme in religious cults.
    -
    Why hated? They both claimed a NEW gospel based on Angel-speak, despite the Published Bible saying "Don't add or take-away", and despite Jesus being "First and Last" Rev 1:11, plus Gal 1:8 " But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed".

    Naturally IMO, all Bible believers would see Mormons and Muslims as attacking the Scripture and undermining Christianity with their Moroni Baloney and koran plaigarism.
    Dux allows: "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out the matter". Pr25:2

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •