Google Ads

Google Ads

Bible Wheel Book

Google Ads

+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456
Results 51 to 60 of 60
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    East of West!
    Posts
    411
    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    Hello Mystykal

    Even if you don't exclusively mean the Bible when you speak of the word of god, you apparently include the biblical compilation of works as part of what you call the word of god...so that means you think the Bible is the word of god - at least in part.

    If I heard a voice from heaven telling me to build an ark I would have to determine at that time what I would do, but I most certainly would not build an ark or anything else based on words in a book written by primitive men who believed in mythological beings. You speak of Noah and the ark as if they were facts in a science book, whereas they are only myths contained in ancient writings. Not one part of the Flood/Ark story is credible, or can hold up to the scientific method, on every count supernatural intervention would have to take place, so why bother having Noah do anything at all...god could have just wiped all life off the planet and started over again with a new Adam and Eve.

    You hold the Bible up as the model by which we should understand how everything was created, yet it is proven wrong over and over again. Positing the statement "In the beginning god created" tells us nothing, so why should anyone believe it? There is not one scrap of evidence anywhere that shows the laws of nature have ever been suspended or altered by anything. Why do you speak as if there is?

    Take care,
    Rose
    Hi Rose:

    So in answer to your question you are right that science has not found any "evidence" for anything approaching explaining the Biblical stories or the origins of the universe. The problem with science is that it is not very scientific! Scientists use science like a religion. They do not look at the facts around them objectivly, You seem to think so but I work with scientists every day and I see them doing just the opposite. So...
    The issue of the GOD Model is one of immortality. The promise of everlasting life is only given through models which as yet cannot be tested by the scientific method. So if you wait for that day to come no faith will be necessary and hence you will be out of luck because the GOD Model requires FAITH. Not stupidity! FAITH-without which it is impossible to please GOD. The whole scheme of the supernatural does not work without the GOD Model. So for you to say that you don't discredit all things spiritual and yet do not believe in GOD is illogical. Just to say that there may be some "unknown intelligence" out there that never can be known with any certainty - which cannot communicate with us and give us enough guidance to let us know how to obtain eternal life is a waste! No point to it. We don't have that kind of time. Martial arts has taught me that the mystical power is real and is available for healing and for all our needs as humans. Finding the inner balance in life is the key.

    "Be still and know that I am GOD."

    Namaste,

    Mystykal
    Last edited by Mystykal; 07-04-2013 at 12:59 AM.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    4,313
    Quote Originally Posted by Mystykal View Post
    Hi Rose:

    So in answer to your question you are right that science has not found any "evidence" for anything approaching explaining the Biblical stories or the origins of the universe. The problem with science is that it is not very scientific! Scientists use science like a religion. They do not look at the facts around them objectivly, You seem to think so but I work with scientists every day and I see them doing just the opposite. So...
    Hello Mystykal

    That is a pretty general and broad statement about science being used like a religion. The only thing that even comes close in the field of science to having a "central dogma" like religion, is the "scientific method" which requires evidence and rigorous testing to be accepted...nothing is simply believed on faith. Just like you can't lump all religious people into one bag, you can't lump all scientists into one bag.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mystykal View Post
    The issue of the GOD Model is one of immortality. The promise of everlasting life is only given through models which as yet cannot be tested by the scientific method. So if you wait for that day to come no faith will be necessary and hence you will be out of luck because the GOD Model requires FAITH. Not stupidity! FAITH-without which it is impossible to please GOD. The whole scheme of the supernatural does not work without the GOD Model.
    If the promise of everlasting life cannot be tested and must be accepted on faith, what model of faith must I have? The Muslim model, the Christian model, or maybe the Hindu model, they are all so different so which one should I choose? If I go to a doctor with a broken leg, he doesn't require me to have faith in him in order to treat me...so, why does god? If something is real it doesn't require people to believe in it in order to work, so why does god?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mystykal View Post
    So for you to say that you don't discredit all things spiritual and yet do not believe in GOD is illogical. Just to say that there may be some "unknown intelligence" out there that never can be known with any certainty - which cannot communicate with us and give us enough guidance to let us know how to obtain eternal life is a waste! No point to it. We don't have that kind of time. Martial arts has taught me that the mystical power is real and is available for healing and for all our needs as humans. Finding the inner balance in life is the key.

    "Be still and know that I am GOD."

    Namaste,

    Mystykal
    There is nothing illogical about not jumping to conclusions about the unknown, just because there are things that we don't understand and are mysterious doesn't mean there is a god. That's what science is all about, trying to understand the unknown so we can create a better world to live in. A world with less disease, more knowledge of our environment, greater understanding of how our bodies work and all the other improvements that make for better living conditions. Science is positive about understanding life here and now, most religions are negative about this life, directing their focus on the afterlife.

    Our bodies have amazing powers of self healing when we have a positive and harmonious frame of mind. Like you said "Finding the inner balance in life is the key." I think all the self healings that people attribute to god come about from within ourselves, when one believes in something strongly enough there is a unity of thought...and where there is unity there is power, even at the cellular level.

    Take care,
    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

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,829
    Quote Originally Posted by David M View Post
    Hello Richard

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough
    I agree that there is a consistent message
    If you agree with me that there is a consistent message, then why are you not looking at all the contradictions you say are in the Bible and looking for the original meaning of the words the author intended us to understand that will take away the contradiction and continue with the consistent message?
    Good afternoon David,

    I didn't say that it had an absolutely consistent message through and through. On the contrary, I said just the opposite. You misrepresented the intent of my words by snipping only that small part. Here is what I said in context:
    I agree that there is a consistent message, but the funny thing is that you and I disagree about what that message actually says! So again, we see that the Bible is not a reliable guide for anything because it is just a pile of ambiguous words that every one interprets differently and there is no way for anyone to prove who is right or wrong. And that's why your illusion that you have "certainty" about your interpretations is so delusional. You hold to fringe doctrines that the vast majority of INTELLIGENT and INFORMED Bible believers disagree with. So why would you have any "confidence" that your fringe beliefs are true? If every agrees that the sky is blue, but you say that it is green, then maybe it would be a little nuts to claim that you have "certainty" that the sky is really green. Maybe a little humility would serve you better.
    The contradictions cannot be resolved by "looking for the original meaning of the words" because the contradictions exist in the original manuscripts. I would never claim that a bad translation was a real contradiction in the Bible.

    Quote Originally Posted by David M View Post
    Whilst you disagree with prophecy which I believe has been fulfilled and the truth of God's word has proven reliable in the past, it is on that basis that I take God's word as trustworthy. I see prophecy being fulfilled in our generation. You do not want to accept these things and you reject any evidence anyone presents to you. You reject everything anyone presents to you that does not fit in with your own thoughts.
    Your assertion that I reject any evidence anyone presents is as false, rude, and absurd. I have only rejected your false and unsupported assertions. What evidence have you presented? You merely make assertions like "the existence of the Bible is a miracle." That's not evidence David.

    This is your problem: I consistently challenge you to present evidence based on logic and facts but you can't do it, so you make false assertions about me rejecting "everything that anyone presents" to me that doesn't fit with my own thoughts. That's not true David. I am an open minded man who freely admits when I am wrong. I have no dogmas to defend. Your assertions are quite ironic because you are actually describing yourself quite accurately. You must reject much science based on evidence because you are defending your false dogmas. You have no evidence supporting your belief in the Bible and you know it because you have not been able to support your claims no matter how many times I've asked. Your attempts are blatantly fallacious. Even if the Bible contained some prophecies, it wouldn't prove that it is all true and trustworthy. You take verses out of context. You make absurd assertions like "The existence of the Bible is a miracle" - that's the primary claim the Muslims make about the Quran! They say that the Quran itself is such a miraculous book that no other proof is needed. And ironically, not how the Quran itself blames people for refusing to receive it! You accuse me of similar things.
    If the whole of mankind and Jinn were to gather together to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they backed up each other with help and support. And We have explained to man, in this Qur'an, every kind of similitude: Yet the greater part of men refuse ( to receive it ) except with ingratitude. (Isra 88-89)
    So here is what we need to do David. It's tedious to constantly be talking past each other. We agree about most things because we are not raving lunatics. Therefore, when we come to a disagreement, our job is to ISOLATE the reason for the disagreement. Then we can AGREE about the reason for the disagreement, and we will come to understand each other's position. If we do this, conversation becomes both fun and fruitful. Otherwise we'll just be talking past each other.

    The key is to actually engage what the other person says. I often get the feeling that you miss my point, misrepresent what I intended, or ignore it all together. That creates a sense of frustration in both of us. We need to actually engage what the other says in a meaningful way.

    Quote Originally Posted by David M View Post
    As for the first part of your reply and the model you like to show, then from the perspective of someone who has never travelled outside their country or further than a few miles from their home, then the top half of that picture is all that they see. From our view stood on the surface of the earth, we only see sky above us, the clouds which bring rain and the sun that gives light and heat. The Bible is not a scientific book, it is more concerned with life and doing that which is righteous and leads to salvation. It would make no difference if the Kingdom of God was built on an infinite flat plane in space, but then that idea would possibly fail unless God changes the forces that govern the universe. People do not have to know the world is a globe to understand the salvation of God. Some people have no sense of perspective or direction and that does not matter; God is not judging us on our ability to deduce that the earth is not flat, but is curved.

    The way the Bible describes things is from the perspective of a person standing on the earth and not from space. I can think that the sun revolves around the earth for that is how it looks from my perspective. It does not make one difference to my life or my salvation that I do not see the earth revolving around the sun.
    That's a common solution I've known about for a long time, but I've never thought it true or worthy of the Bible. When I was a Christian, I believed the Bible was God's Word, a revelation inspired by God. Your solution makes it into yet another fallacious man-made book filled with all sorts of misleading junk written by limited fallible humans, not inspired by God. If we follow your suggestion, then which parts of the Bible are true and which are based on fallible human perspective?

    It looks to me that the cure is worse than the disease. By trying to find a way to protect the Bible as "God's inspired word" you have declared it to be the word of fallible men with limited perspective who were actually ignorant of basic science like the age of the earth, how it came to be, etc.

    All the best,

    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. #54
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,564
    Hello Richard
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    Good afternoon David,

    I didn't say that it had an absolutely consistent message through and through. On the contrary, I said just the opposite. You misrepresented the intent of my words by snipping only that small part. Here is what I said in context:
    I agree that there is a consistent message, but the funny thing is that you and I disagree about what that message actually says! So again, we see that the Bible is not a reliable guide for anything because it is just a pile of ambiguous words that every one interprets differently and there is no way for anyone to prove who is right or wrong. And that's why your illusion that you have "certainty" about your interpretations is so delusional. You hold to fringe doctrines that the vast majority of INTELLIGENT and INFORMED Bible believers disagree with. So why would you have any "confidence" that your fringe beliefs are true? If every agrees that the sky is blue, but you say that it is green, then maybe it would be a little nuts to claim that you have "certainty" that the sky is really green. Maybe a little humility would serve you better.
    The contradictions cannot be resolved by "looking for the original meaning of the words" because the contradictions exist in the original manuscripts. I would never claim that a bad translation was a real contradiction in the Bible.
    You should not have said; " I agree that there is a consistent message". I see you twisting and squirming and doing all the things you generalize and accuse Christians of doing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    Your assertion that I reject any evidence anyone presents is as false, rude, and absurd. I have only rejected your false and unsupported assertions. What evidence have you presented? You merely make assertions like "the existence of the Bible is a miracle." That's not evidence David.
    You can think it is rude, but I do not merely make assertions like the one you have quoted. That is only a fraction of what I have presented and so once again you distort the truth to put the other person in a bad light while presenting yourself in the best light. I am cheesed off with this type of conversation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    This is your problem: I consistently challenge you to present evidence based on logic and facts but you can't do it, so you make false assertions about me rejecting "everything that anyone presents" to me that doesn't fit with my own thoughts. That's not true David. I am an open minded man who freely admits when I am wrong. I have no dogmas to defend. Your assertions are quite ironic because you are actually describing yourself quite accurately. You must reject much science based on evidence because you are defending your false dogmas. You have no evidence supporting your belief in the Bible and you know it because you have not been able to support your claims no matter how many times I've asked. Your attempts are blatantly fallacious. Even if the Bible contained some prophecies, it wouldn't prove that it is all true and trustworthy. You take verses out of context. You make absurd assertions like "The existence of the Bible is a miracle" - that's the primary claim the Muslims make about the Quran! They say that the Quran itself is such a miraculous book that no other proof is needed. And ironically, not how the Quran itself blames people for refusing to receive it! You accuse me of similar things.
    If the whole of mankind and Jinn were to gather together to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they backed up each other with help and support. And We have explained to man, in this Qur'an, every kind of similitude: Yet the greater part of men refuse ( to receive it ) except with ingratitude. (Isra 88-89)
    So here is what we need to do David. It's tedious to constantly be talking past each other. We agree about most things because we are not raving lunatics. Therefore, when we come to a disagreement, our job is to ISOLATE the reason for the disagreement. Then we can AGREE about the reason for the disagreement, and we will come to understand each other's position. If we do this, conversation becomes both fun and fruitful. Otherwise we'll just be talking past each other.
    Please stop generalizing and be specific as I have asked. I have challenged your logic and in generalizing you have made things worse by introducing further ambiguities. I have given you evidence and reasons which you simply deny and dismiss. You can argue against this and so we shall continue for ever to do the same. Please stop generalizing and introducing the arguments like the Quran. Our objective is to understand the word of God as we should and we should both be looking to correct the error which have been introduced by the transcribers and translators. Until we agree the wording and the message from the individual authors, we cannot agree what the Bible is telling us.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    The key is to actually engage what the other person says. I often get the feeling that you miss my point, misrepresent what I intended, or ignore it all together. That creates a sense of frustration in both of us. We need to actually engage what the other says in a meaningful way.
    On this I agree and whilst I might miss some of your points, the same applies to you. We tend not to acknowledge every point that is made by way of reply. Instead of arguing about the point I have misinterpreted what you say, I have asked you what is it in the Bible you say has a consistent message. Either there is something that is consistent, or your words are meaningless and should not have been said. I was hoping that you have seen a consistent message (whether we agree or not) for that gives us a basis for discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    That's a common solution I've known about for a long time, but I've never thought it true or worthy of the Bible. When I was a Christian, I believed the Bible was God's Word, a revelation inspired by God. Your solution makes it into yet another fallacious man-made book filled with all sorts of misleading junk written by limited fallible humans, not inspired by God. If we follow your suggestion, then which parts of the Bible are true and which are based on fallible human perspective?
    I do not have a list that I can easily paste by way of reply. However, if we seriously do some exposition on some of these things, then we can take all this into account. It is easy for us to point out each other's mistakes and so we should be looking to correct the mistakes that others have introduced into the Bible. Either you want to correct the mistakes, which lead to getting closer to the truth and the consistent message from God, or you do not and just want to keep on saying it is full of error and inconsistency. One of us could have a problem. You have already changed your opinion of the Bible and I maintain that you did not found have the truth and have been taught and believed lies which are still in your mind to this day. I have not followed after the lies of men, and so have no reason to change that which I have come to believe in the Bible.
    If I was to say God is 99% truthful that implies I think God is 1% untruthful. I cannot accept God is untruthful. God is perfect and he as the creator and who knows us, requires us to strive for perfection, which has been demonstrated in the person of his only begotten Son. Form your perspective, the Bible is not the work of God and is purely the work of men without inspiration from God. You might want to cling on to that opinion, but I shall be holding to mine. One way to begin a dialogue is to consider the history referred to in the Bible and agree the history which is true. Maybe from there we can look at prophecy that has been fulfilled in history related to that which we have already agreed is true.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    It looks to me that the cure is worse than the disease. By trying to find a way to protect the Bible as "God's inspired word" you have declared it to be the word of fallible men with limited perspective who were actually ignorant of basic science like the age of the earth, how it came to be, etc.
    Again that is your opinion biassed to reflect your conclusion which is not the conclusion I am drawing. Inspired men, might not have been knowledgeable compared to 21st century thinking. We do not know if all the prophets could write or that that which had been revealed to them was written down by scribes who would hear the words of the prophet. How many people today cannot write? Are people ignorant because they cannot write? The prophets did not have to understand everything that was revealed to them. The job of the prophets was to deliver the message. Why assume the message is not the word of God, because of the person who delivers it. You will be asking for our mail to be delivered to our mail boxes by people who have degrees in logistics. That sounds ridiculous, yet you do not see how ridiculous your argument is to me.

    Let's get beyond generalizations, stop referring the likes of the Muslims and the Quran or crazy Christians and deal with specifics in the Bible. I will leave you to continue your style of argument with others. I have had enough of this type of argument. I only ever wanted to reason from the Bible and get down to the truth of the message and leaning on your expertise of Hebrew and Greek or that of other's knowledge of these languages in order to get to the original meanings. Not reaching agreement on everything in the Bible is not reason for rejecting everything in the Bible. If by working through the Bible it is possible to get to a position where 51% of the Bible is seen as true, that is good enough for me, and the remaining 49% has to be worked at. Lets say the 49% requires some faith. Without faith, it is impossible to please God. Getting to 51% is more that half and is therefore grounds for not rejecting the Bible as a whole. However, for the sake of argument and for the pursuance of truth, I shall not make the assumption that we shall get to 51%. How we achieve this daunting task is the problem set before us.

    All the best

    David
    Last edited by David M; 07-05-2013 at 03:35 AM.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,564
    Hello Rose
    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    Hello David

    No, I didn't make assumptions about "all" Christians, I said "many" Christians.
    My bad for missing your qualification. So do you hold any Christians and what they believe in higher esteem than others and who are they?


    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    I never said Evolution is based on a miracle! My statement was in response to what you said about the miracle of the Jews.
    No you did not state it, but that is what your statement inferred and lead me to understand.



    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    The theory of evolution does not predict the end of the earth, rather scientists know when the earth will end from the size of our sun...in around 5 billion years it will grow into a Red Giant and engulf the earth...end of story.
    Evolution is a scientific fact, therefore science is predicting the earth and evolution will end when the sun dies. Evolution is not predicting that it will go on for ever nor is it predicting it will finish. With no end in sight evolution is blind. However, I am going on what scientists say, since evolution does not have a voice and it is scientists who are speaking.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    I don't really call positing god an answer to anything, and besides that positing god as the creator of the universe says nothing about the authenticity of the Biblegod. Archaeological evidence has only confirmed the existence of a few cities and kings contained in the Bible, but says nothing about any of the major claims that Scripture makes. There is not one shred of evidence for Noah, Abraham, or Moses and many scholars believe that if a king named David did exist he was no more than a tribal ruler of a small region.
    Rose, you are not keeping up with events. Evidence has been found to the existence of King David and Abraham and others. You are like the proverbial ostrich burying its head in the sand. Many skeptics (like you) who once believed the city of Babylon did not exist and that the city was fictitious, were in ignorance until it was found buried below the sand. Now the city of Babylon is a well-known fact. If you want to deny the evidence that is coming to light in these days to prove the skeptics wrong, then that shows how blinkered you are.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    The Bible has not given people answers to anything, all the discoveries and inventions of man have come about by a lot of physical and intellectual hard work and trial and error. Where was god for all those thousands of years when infections killed people by the millions, or when women who died in childbirth could have been saved?
    This is a weak argument on your part. We have always had death since Adam and Eve. Their fall from perfection and their sin. is the cause of all that which is not healthy in this world. Snakes bite and kill and in the wilderness we see the provision of God and the faith that it required for people to go and look at the snake on the pole. If they did not show faith, they would not be cured from the snake bite and they would die. This is the simple lesson we learn. God is in the position to put all this right and he has promised to do so. God has put in place the remedy to escape eternal death, God has not put in place the remedy for every illness and disease this world faces. If everyone had faith and believed and trusted in God, then the situation would be very much different. That is not the way of this world and the majority like you do not have faith and do not have belief and trust in God. You are contributing to the sickness of the world and not part of the solution.

    Jesus knew that after he left to go to be with his Heavenly Father the the sick and the poor would remain and would need to be looked after. This is what he told his disciples and it was better for them at that time to concentrate on what he had to teach them. The same as Mary was commended for taking time out of her serving duty to listen to the message of Jesus. We have to take these lessons on board. I do not deny the good doctors do, but they do not heal and they have no cure for the eternal death we face. God has given us the solution and given us the evidence and the assurance of this by raising His only begotten Son.

    We are not living in a perfect world and that imperfection began as a result of what Adam and Eve did. We have a very simple explanation for the origin of the evil things we see in the world which we do not like. God has said he will put things right and has set out the way in which it will be done. God is selecting those who believe in him and have faith. If you have given up your faith and lost your belief, then that has been your choice. If you continually seek to find excuses for not believing in God you will easily find them and continue to remain dead in your sins. The Bible has a very blunt message and yet has an equally positive message, which you refuse to acknowledge and promote, and so only concentrate on the negative.

    All the best

    David
    Last edited by David M; 07-05-2013 at 04:11 AM.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    665
    Quote Originally Posted by David M View Post
    Rose, you are not keeping up with events. Evidence has been found to the existence of King David and Abraham and others. You are like the proverbial ostrich burying its head in the sand. Many skeptics (like you) who once believed the city of Babylon did not exist and that the city was fictitious, were in ignorance until it was found buried below the sand. Now the city of Babylon is a well-known fact. If you want to deny the evidence that is coming to light in these days to prove the skeptics wrong, then that shows how blinkered you are.
    Hey David.

    What evidence? You routinely make these statements and then provide no evidence. Also you have questioned the dating methods accuracy many times, so how do we know the evidence was dated correctly? How do we know the evidence was from king Davids time or Babylon? This is a double standard you Christians routinely make. When it suits you the dating methods are never questioned and always legit.

    It's funny how you tell people how blinkered they are for rejecting evidence you never posted. But YOU are guilty of rejecting established facts all the time when it doesn't suit your beliefs. By your logic that means you are blinkered beyond belief.


    Please post all this evidence you claim exists.
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace - Jimi Hendrix


  7. #57
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    4,313
    Quote Originally Posted by David M View Post
    Hello Rose

    Evolution is a scientific fact, therefore science is predicting the earth and evolution will end when the sun dies. Evolution is not predicting that it will go on for ever nor is it predicting it will finish. With no end in sight evolution is blind. However, I am going on what scientists say, since evolution does not have a voice and it is scientists who are speaking.
    Hello David,

    The voice that evolution has is the evidence that scientists are interpreting. Evolution speaks through fossils and the code of DNA, this tells scientists how things evolved.

    Quote Originally Posted by David M View Post
    Rose, you are not keeping up with events. Evidence has been found to the existence of King David and Abraham and others. You are like the proverbial ostrich burying its head in the sand. Many skeptics (like you) who once believed the city of Babylon did not exist and that the city was fictitious, were in ignorance until it was found buried below the sand. Now the city of Babylon is a well-known fact. If you want to deny the evidence that is coming to light in these days to prove the skeptics wrong, then that shows how blinkered you are.
    Quite the contrary, I am most certainly keeping up with current archaeological findings, so I repeat: there is no verifiable evidence that Noah, Abraham or Moses ever existed. As for David only one reference to the House of David has been found, and that says nothing about whether he was a ruler of a small tribal region or a larger area. Most current biblical historians believe that Davids kingdom was nowhere near as big as the Bible claims...there is just no archaeological evidence for it. Without Noah, Moses, and Abraham the whole Bible loses its validity.

    Quote Originally Posted by David M View Post
    This is a weak argument on your part. We have always had death since Adam and Eve. Their fall from perfection and their sin. is the cause of all that which is not healthy in this world. Snakes bite and kill and in the wilderness we see the provision of God and the faith that it required for people to go and look at the snake on the pole. If they did not show faith, they would not be cured from the snake bite and they would die. This is the simple lesson we learn. God is in the position to put all this right and he has promised to do so. God has put in place the remedy to escape eternal death, God has not put in place the remedy for every illness and disease this world faces. If everyone had faith and believed and trusted in God, then the situation would be very much different. That is not the way of this world and the majority like you do not have faith and do not have belief and trust in God. You are contributing to the sickness of the world and not part of the solution.

    Jesus knew that after he left to go to be with his Heavenly Father the the sick and the poor would remain and would need to be looked after. This is what he told his disciples and it was better for them at that time to concentrate on what he had to teach them. The same as Mary was commended for taking time out of her serving duty to listen to the message of Jesus. We have to take these lessons on board. I do not deny the good doctors do, but they do not heal and they have no cure for the eternal death we face. God has given us the solution and given us the evidence and the assurance of this by raising His only begotten Son.

    We are not living in a perfect world and that imperfection began as a result of what Adam and Eve did. We have a very simple explanation for the origin of the evil things we see in the world which we do not like. God has said he will put things right and has set out the way in which it will be done. God is selecting those who believe in him and have faith. If you have given up your faith and lost your belief, then that has been your choice. If you continually seek to find excuses for not believing in God you will easily find them and continue to remain dead in your sins. The Bible has a very blunt message and yet has an equally positive message, which you refuse to acknowledge and promote, and so only concentrate on the negative.

    All the best

    David
    The overused justification of why god doesn't heal disease because people don't having enough faith is lame, and blaming the worlds problems on Adam and Eve is ridiculous. Doctors don't require their patients to have faith before they try and heal them, neither does faith play any part in people showing mercy to strangers. Why does god require faith and belief before he will do anything to help people? All the Bible does is threaten people with damnation if they don't believe. Would you demand that your child have faith in you before you would take them to a doctor if they were sick? I hope not!

    I don't have to make excuses for not believing in god, just like I don't have to make excuses for not believing in pink unicorns. I see nothing positive about the nature of the Bible's message, since it starts with a biased framework set up by a immoral tyrannical god who's sole objective is to obtain peoples worship and obedience.

    Take care,
    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

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,829
    Quote Originally Posted by David M View Post
    Hello Richard

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    Good afternoon David,

    I didn't say that it had an absolutely consistent message through and through. On the contrary, I said just the opposite. You misrepresented the intent of my words by snipping only that small part. Here is what I said in context:
    I agree that there is a consistent message, but the funny thing is that you and I disagree about what that message actually says! So again, we see that the Bible is not a reliable guide for anything because it is just a pile of ambiguous words that every one interprets differently and there is no way for anyone to prove who is right or wrong. And that's why your illusion that you have "certainty" about your interpretations is so delusional. You hold to fringe doctrines that the vast majority of INTELLIGENT and INFORMED Bible believers disagree with. So why would you have any "confidence" that your fringe beliefs are true? If every agrees that the sky is blue, but you say that it is green, then maybe it would be a little nuts to claim that you have "certainty" that the sky is really green. Maybe a little humility would serve you better.
    The contradictions cannot be resolved by "looking for the original meaning of the words" because the contradictions exist in the original manuscripts. I would never claim that a bad translation was a real contradiction in the Bible.
    You should not have said; " I agree that there is a consistent message". I see you twisting and squirming and doing all the things you generalize and accuse Christians of doing.
    Good morning David,

    You are right, I should not have simply said it had a "consistent message". I should have been more careful with my words and said that "different readers can each find their own fairly consistent message depending on what presuppositions they hold, despite the gross inconsistencies within itself as well as with history, science, and logic." But since I'd already said all that to you a thousand times in our many conversations over the last year I didn't think it would be necessary to repeat it. I expected you to understand. The fact that I need to explain myself is disappointing.

    Your assertion that I am "twisting and squirming" is entirely unjustified. All I did was explain what I meant, and my explanation was completely consistent with what I have been saying to your for a full year now. You are the one who took a SENTENCE FRAGMENT OUT OF CONTEXT and TWISTED IT in your effort to force me to say something that obviously contradicts what I believe, what I said in the immediate context of my comment, as well as what I've said in a thousand posts on this forum. So there is no justification for you assertion that I am "twisting and turning".

    And worse, you have now ignored what I actually wrote twice in a row. Look at it again. Look at the words highlighted red. That's what I really believe and you know it. It was ludicrous for you to take the first part of the sentence and press it as an absolute while ignoring my explanation that I gave in context. You didn't deal with what I actually wrote at all. You ignored the main point. It's like you are not even trying to be rational. The whole point of my comment was that the Bible is obviously not trustworthy as a guide because it is so ambiguous that no one can agree about what it says. For you to ignore what I obviously meant is bad enough. It's totally insane for you to then take a sentence fragment out of context, twist my intent, and use that as the basis for your accusation that I am "twisting and turning".

    Quote Originally Posted by David M View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RAM
    Quote Originally Posted by David M
    Whilst you disagree with prophecy which I believe has been fulfilled and the truth of God's word has proven reliable in the past, it is on that basis that I take God's word as trustworthy. I see prophecy being fulfilled in our generation. You do not want to accept these things and you reject any evidence anyone presents to you. You reject everything anyone presents to you that does not fit in with your own thoughts.
    Your assertion that I reject any evidence anyone presents is as false, rude, and absurd. I have only rejected your false and unsupported assertions. What evidence have you presented? You merely make assertions like "the existence of the Bible is a miracle." That's not evidence David.
    You can think it is rude, but I do not merely make assertions like the one you have quoted. That is only a fraction of what I have presented and so once again you distort the truth to put the other person in a bad light while presenting yourself in the best light. I am cheesed off with this type of conversation.
    I don't merely "think" it is rude, everyone can see that it is rude. But I can see why you are upset. You took my comment in an absolute sense, as if I were saying that you never have given any evidence of any kind for any of your beliefs. It should be obvious that was not my intent since such a claim would be absurd. When I said you "merely make assertions" I was speaking only in general terms, not absolutely, and I gave you a specific example of what I meant from a comment you made within the last week. So your complaint is unjustified. I gave evidence for my assertion by accurately quoting your own words.

    I'm glad you are "cheesed off at this kind of conversation" because I am too. At least there's something we can agree about!

    Quote Originally Posted by David M View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    This is your problem: I consistently challenge you to present evidence based on logic and facts but you can't do it, so you make false assertions about me rejecting "everything that anyone presents" to me that doesn't fit with my own thoughts. That's not true David. I am an open minded man who freely admits when I am wrong. I have no dogmas to defend. Your assertions are quite ironic because you are actually describing yourself quite accurately. You must reject much science based on evidence because you are defending your false dogmas. You have no evidence supporting your belief in the Bible and you know it because you have not been able to support your claims no matter how many times I've asked. Your attempts are blatantly fallacious. Even if the Bible contained some prophecies, it wouldn't prove that it is all true and trustworthy. You take verses out of context. You make absurd assertions like "The existence of the Bible is a miracle" - that's the primary claim the Muslims make about the Quran! They say that the Quran itself is such a miraculous book that no other proof is needed. And ironically, not how the Quran itself blames people for refusing to receive it! You accuse me of similar things.
    If the whole of mankind and Jinn were to gather together to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they backed up each other with help and support. And We have explained to man, in this Qur'an, every kind of similitude: Yet the greater part of men refuse ( to receive it ) except with ingratitude. (Isra 88-89)
    So here is what we need to do David. It's tedious to constantly be talking past each other. We agree about most things because we are not raving lunatics. Therefore, when we come to a disagreement, our job is to ISOLATE the reason for the disagreement. Then we can AGREE about the reason for the disagreement, and we will come to understand each other's position. If we do this, conversation becomes both fun and fruitful. Otherwise we'll just be talking past each other.
    Please stop generalizing and be specific as I have asked. I have challenged your logic and in generalizing you have made things worse by introducing further ambiguities. I have given you evidence and reasons which you simply deny and dismiss. You can argue against this and so we shall continue for ever to do the same. Please stop generalizing and introducing the arguments like the Quran. Our objective is to understand the word of God as we should and we should both be looking to correct the error which have been introduced by the transcribers and translators. Until we agree the wording and the message from the individual authors, we cannot agree what the Bible is telling us.
    I have been specific. What evidence have you given that I simply "deny and dismiss"? I have always given you very SPECIFIC REASONS and SPECIFIC EVIDENCE that show why your arguments fail. The fact that you reply with more empty assertions only proves my point. If I have denied or dismissed some real evidence without good reason, all you need to do is quote the SPECIFIC EVIDENCE that I simply "rejected without reason." But you never do that. You just make empty generalized assertions about nothingness. There's no way for me to even know what you are talking about because you have not said which argument I dismissed without reason. Your comments are empty. Please try a little harder to be SPECIFIC about your charges. Please try to avoid EMPTY GENERALIZATIONS or I won't have any way to know what you are talking about.

    Your opposition to "generalizations" in general makes no sense. They are not the source of ambiguities. On the contrary, they are the root of understanding because they remove ambiguities and show overarching patterns that unite seemingly distinct phenomena. They are the root of all disciplined thought like science and math. Do you not understand that the "holy grail" of physics is the Grand Unified Theory that would explain all reality in one grand generalized equation? That's the ultimate "generalization". And mathematics is nothing if not a set of generalizations. There are, of course, two kinds of generalizations. There are the generalizations like science and math that describe aspects of reality, and there are empty "generalizations" that have no content like your accusations against me.

    Case in point: My examples of how believers in all religions share common beliefs about their different holy books is a valid generalization that gives real insight into the fact that religious believers tend to delude themselves about their holy books. This is obvious because they can't all be true. This fact should cause any intelligence believer to stop and reflect on the fact that they must have some real evidence for their beliefs because they could just as well have believed in some other religion. That's why I keep bringing this up. You have not dealt with this fact yet.

    You asked me to be specific but you failed to specify what I'm supposed to be specific about. If you ask me a specific question I will answer just as specifically.

    Your comment contains a reference to the Bible as the "Word of God" even though I have shown that you have no justification to call it such. I have shown you very SPECIFICALLY why you have no foundation for your beliefs, and you have totally ignored all the evidence and reason I have presented. Here it is in a nutshell.

    1) You have never given sufficient evidence to support your assertion that there are fulfilled prophecies.

    2) You have never given reason to believe that all the books are inspired merely because there are some fulfilled prophecies in some of the books.

    3) You have not dealt sufficiently with the many examples of gross errors, inconsistencies, and scientific absurdities in the Bible. For example, the Flood is a scientific impossibility. The birth narratives in Matthew and Luke are contradictory. It is impossible to harmonize all the details in the four Gospels concerning the death and resurrection of Christ. Etc.

    I trust that's sufficiently "specific" for you.

    Quote Originally Posted by David M View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    The key is to actually engage what the other person says. I often get the feeling that you miss my point, misrepresent what I intended, or ignore it all together. That creates a sense of frustration in both of us. We need to actually engage what the other says in a meaningful way.
    On this I agree and whilst I might miss some of your points, the same applies to you. We tend not to acknowledge every point that is made by way of reply. Instead of arguing about the point I have misinterpreted what you say, I have asked you what is it in the Bible you say has a consistent message. Either there is something that is consistent, or your words are meaningless and should not have been said. I was hoping that you have seen a consistent message (whether we agree or not) for that gives us a basis for discussion.
    I'm glad we agree about this point. It is of the essence. But again we see the fundamental error in your approach. You took a sentence fragment out of context and now are hammering away on it as if it were the foundation stone of all my thought. It's quite ironic that you do this even as you say you agree that we should "actually engage what the other person says". You are not doing that when you take a sentence fragment and IGNORE everything else I said in the immediate context that also coheres with everything I've been saying to you for over a year!

    I think it would be great to discuss the "consistent message" of the Bible, but you shouldn't start by putting words in my mouth. If you would like to pursue this topic, maybe it would be good to start a thread and I'll respond there.

    Quote Originally Posted by David M View Post
    I do not have a list that I can easily paste by way of reply. However, if we seriously do some exposition on some of these things, then we can take all this into account. It is easy for us to point out each other's mistakes and so we should be looking to correct the mistakes that others have introduced into the Bible. Either you want to correct the mistakes, which lead to getting closer to the truth and the consistent message from God, or you do not and just want to keep on saying it is full of error and inconsistency. One of us could have a problem. You have already changed your opinion of the Bible and I maintain that you did not found have the truth and have been taught and believed lies which are still in your mind to this day. I have not followed after the lies of men, and so have no reason to change that which I have come to believe in the Bible.
    First, no one can "fix" the errors in the Bible without changing the Bible because the Bible has real errors in it. I'm not talking about errors in translation or copying. I'm talking about the documents in the original languages.

    Second, why should we think to "fix" the Bible in the first place? If it is the Word of God, then why didn't God fix it? If he couldn't keep the errors out, why should we believe he was able to inspire it without error in the first place? Your position makes no sense at all.

    Third, you constantly make false assertions that I "want" the Bible to be full of error and inconsistency. That is ludicrous! I was a BELIEVING CHRISTIAN who was disturbed by the TRUTH that the Bible contains errors and inconsistency. All honest Christians know this. Only the ignorant or the deluded could deny something so obvious.

    Fourth, your constant assertion that I cannot find the solutions because I "have been taught and believed lies which are still in [my] mind to this day" is utterly nutty, dude! It's off the charts insane - totally disconnected from reality. I don't even believe the Bible is generally true, let alone any of the doctrines believers have invented over the millennia. And I always give you good reasons for my understanding that have nothing to do with anything that I have been "taught". Your comment is the essence of irony because YOU are the one who one who believes in dogmas taught by men, not me. You follow the teachings of a man - one Dr. John Thomas - who invented the sect of the Christadelphians. I have come to this conclusion because you hold to a specific set of dogmas that is unique to that one specific denomination of Christianity. Other groups hold some of the same dogmas, but only the Christadelphians hold to all the doctrines you profess. So hows that for irony? I am the one with no dogmas, but you think I am the one following the teachings of men. I've brought this to your attention many times and you have never engaged me in a rational discussion about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by David M View Post
    If I was to say God is 99% truthful that implies I think God is 1% untruthful. I cannot accept God is untruthful. God is perfect and he as the creator and who knows us, requires us to strive for perfection, which has been demonstrated in the person of his only begotten Son. Form your perspective, the Bible is not the work of God and is purely the work of men without inspiration from God. You might want to cling on to that opinion, but I shall be holding to mine. One way to begin a dialogue is to consider the history referred to in the Bible and agree the history which is true. Maybe from there we can look at prophecy that has been fulfilled in history related to that which we have already agreed is true.
    Your beliefs have no basis in reality. If God were only half as trustworthy as the average dentist, there would be no dispute about his existence. Christianity has destroyed the meaning of the word "trustworthy." There is not one thing that you can actually "trust" God to do for you. NOT ONE. So you change the meaning of "trustworthy" to be "God will always do what he said." That means that you can just quibble over what "God said" until you reduce it to ABSOLUTELY NOTHING relevant to life in this world or anything that can be confirmed. Wonderful. So now saying "God is trustworthy" is utterly and absolutely meaningless because you know that you cannot TRUST GOD to do anything. All prayers are vanity. This is what you admit when you say that "God is trustworthy" means only that he will "do" things that cannot be verified (hence, cannot be trusted).

    This is the vanity of religion. It's nothing but a bunch of empty words that give FALSE CONFIDENCE in a God that cannot actually be trusted to do anything for anyone in any situation.

    And again, you make a false equivalence between our positions when you say "You might want to cling on to that opinion, but I shall be holding to mine." Not all opinions are equally valid. I have evidence for my opinions. You do not. That's the whole point of this debate.

    As for history in the Bible - it means nothing if some of it is true. The Koran contains some true history. That says nothing about the general truth of its religious claims. You would know this if you did not reject "generalized thinking" (which is the essence of intelligence).

    Quote Originally Posted by David M View Post
    Maybe from there we can look at prophecy that has been fulfilled in history related to that which we have already agreed is true.
    We've already done that and concluded that there is no evidence that would satisfy a rational skeptic. If you would like to try again, please start or point me to a thread where you are presenting evidence for fulfilled prophecies and I will answer.

    Quote Originally Posted by David M View Post
    Again that is your opinion biassed to reflect your conclusion which is not the conclusion I am drawing. Inspired men, might not have been knowledgeable compared to 21st century thinking. We do not know if all the prophets could write or that that which had been revealed to them was written down by scribes who would hear the words of the prophet. How many people today cannot write? Are people ignorant because they cannot write? The prophets did not have to understand everything that was revealed to them. The job of the prophets was to deliver the message. Why assume the message is not the word of God, because of the person who delivers it. You will be asking for our mail to be delivered to our mail boxes by people who have degrees in logistics. That sounds ridiculous, yet you do not see how ridiculous your argument is to me.
    First, it is not true that my opinion is "biased to reflect my conclusion". I explicitly told you that I was not satisfied with that solution even when when I was a Bible believing Christian. I wanted a solution but was not willing to accept something like that which fails on many points.

    Second, I never said that the "inspired men" were supposed to have any knowledge of 21st century thinking. But the God who supposedly inspired the Bible is supposed to have all knowledge, so it is absurd to say that the Bible is both "inspired" and yet filled with errors based on the ignorant limited perspective of primitive men who wrote it. If God allowed all that human ignorance into the Bible, then why should we believe any of it? And how are we supposed to sort out the false from the true? Obviously, we need to use our fallible human understanding, and would have to develop a SCIENCE of Bible interpretation! But that would lead to endless disputes since there is no way for anyone to prove which interpretation is correct and besides, you totally reject SCIENCE as "inadequate" so you would have to reject the Bible "Science" too. In short, you position is logically incoherent.

    Third, you "mailman" analogy fails because the in your analogy the mailman not only delivers the message, but writes it down too.

    Quote Originally Posted by David M View Post
    Let's get beyond generalizations, stop referring the likes of the Muslims and the Quran or crazy Christians and deal with specifics in the Bible. I will leave you to continue your style of argument with others. I have had enough of this type of argument. I only ever wanted to reason from the Bible and get down to the truth of the message and leaning on your expertise of Hebrew and Greek or that of other's knowledge of these languages in order to get to the original meanings. Not reaching agreement on everything in the Bible is not reason for rejecting everything in the Bible. If by working through the Bible it is possible to get to a position where 51% of the Bible is seen as true, that is good enough for me, and the remaining 49% has to be worked at. Lets say the 49% requires some faith. Without faith, it is impossible to please God. Getting to 51% is more that half and is therefore grounds for not rejecting the Bible as a whole. However, for the sake of argument and for the pursuance of truth, I shall not make the assumption that we shall get to 51%. How we achieve this daunting task is the problem set before us.
    I have been "dealing with specifics in the Bible" in all our conversations for the past year. I have also spoken other religions to help you see that your belief in the Bible appears to be similar to the bias that all believers have for their own holy books. If you can't see and understand this, then you could be deluded without knowing it. If your arguments for the Bible are the same as those of Muslims and Mormons, then why do you have any confidence in them It would logically inconsistent.

    But I understand that your real interest is in discussing the meaning of the Bible from a believer's perspective. That's cool. I can appreciate that. And I'm willing to discuss that with you.

    As for a Bible (God's Word) that is 51% true - you and I have very different standards! Would you accept a math book that was only 51% true? A chemistry book? Half of a doctors patients would DIE if he were only 51% accurate in his work. I find it quite ironic (and revealing) that you have such low standards for the Bible. You are implicitly admitting that the book is worse (less accurate, less true) than the vast majority of scientific texts written by humans. Fascinating.

    Great chatting!

    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

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,829
    Quote Originally Posted by L67 View Post
    Hey David.

    What evidence? You routinely make these statements and then provide no evidence.
    I'd like to confirm the truth of that assertion. There are times when David provides some evidence, but in my estimation he more frequently merely makes assertions without evidence, and frequently ignores evidence that contradicts his assertions.

    Quote Originally Posted by L67 View Post
    Also you have questioned the dating methods accuracy many times, so how do we know the evidence was dated correctly? How do we know the evidence was from king Davids time or Babylon? This is a double standard you Christians routinely make. When it suits you the dating methods are never questioned and always legit.
    That's an extremely important point. Sauce for the gander is sauce for the goose. Believers tend to accept or reject science depending on whether or not it fits their beliefs. That is the definition of cognitive bias.

    Quote Originally Posted by L67 View Post
    It's funny how you tell people how blinkered they are for rejecting evidence you never posted. But YOU are guilty of rejecting established facts all the time when it doesn't suit your beliefs. By your logic that means you are blinkered beyond belief.
    Again, I'd like to confirm that observation. David show extreme skepticism for established facts that contradict his beliefs, and no skeptics for the things he believes. Again, that is a textbook example of a cognitive bias.

    Quote Originally Posted by L67 View Post
    Please post all this evidence you claim exists.
    This would be great. And even better, I would like him to post a quote where I rejected his "evidence" without giving good reasons.
    • 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. #60
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    East of West!
    Posts
    411

    The Bible is NOT a reflection of GOD!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    Hello David,

    The voice that evolution has is the evidence that scientists are interpreting. Evolution speaks through fossils and the code of DNA, this tells scientists how things evolved.



    Quite the contrary, I am most certainly keeping up with current archaeological findings, so I repeat: there is no verifiable evidence that Noah, Abraham or Moses ever existed. As for David only one reference to the House of David has been found, and that says nothing about whether he was a ruler of a small tribal region or a larger area. Most current biblical historians believe that Davids kingdom was nowhere near as big as the Bible claims...there is just no archaeological evidence for it. Without Noah, Moses, and Abraham the whole Bible loses its validity.



    The overused justification of why god doesn't heal disease because people don't having enough faith is lame, and blaming the worlds problems on Adam and Eve is ridiculous. Doctors don't require their patients to have faith before they try and heal them, neither does faith play any part in people showing mercy to strangers. Why does god require faith and belief before he will do anything to help people? All the Bible does is threaten people with damnation if they don't believe. Would you demand that your child have faith in you before you would take them to a doctor if they were sick? I hope not!

    I don't have to make excuses for not believing in god, just like I don't have to make excuses for not believing in pink unicorns. I see nothing positive about the nature of the Bible's message, since it starts with a biased framework set up by a immoral tyrannical god who's sole objective is to obtain peoples worship and obedience.

    Take care,
    Rose
    Hi Rose:

    You said , "All the Bible does is threaten people with damnation if they don't believe. Would you demand that your child have faith in you before you would take them to a doctor if they were sick? I hope not!I don't have to make excuses for not believing in god, just like I don't have to make excuses for not believing in pink unicorns. I see nothing positive about the nature of the Bible's message, since it starts with a biased framework set up by a immoral tyrannical god who's sole objective is to obtain peoples worship and obedience.

    So where do you get the idea that the Bible is set up by "a tyranical GOD"? Do you seriously believe that death and destruction is a result of GOD? You have already stated that you do NOT believe in GOD any more than "pink unicorns"... OK Then why do you insist that the TRUE GOD Model is so evil. Perhaps the model you so dislike does not exist in reality. Perhaps you should discard your silly GOD Model and just meditate into the void... You keep striking out at a GOD that only exists in the minds of angry people trying to blame the ills of the world on a GOD that is not even real! At least be consistent and don't blame GOD for all the evil in the world. It does not make you look like a logical person. Trying to create a scape goat for the ills of the world is pointless. You are smarter than that I am sure.

    Namaste,

    Mystykal
    Last edited by Mystykal; 07-07-2013 at 12:36 AM.

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
  •