DrDawkinstein Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 You say you do not trust the wisdom of men, yet you trust the wisdom of men 2,000 years ago to themselves pick and choose what books belong in the Bible, while rejecting ones that they (men) didn't feel fit? Beat me to it, Im curious on this point as well. Men now, not good enough. Men 2000 years ago living in a desert with little outside knowledge, ok? Kinda a tough sell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 You say you do not trust the wisdom of men, yet you trust the wisdom of men 2,000 years ago to themselves pick and choose what books belong in the Bible, while rejecting ones that they (men) didn't feel fit? I trust in the Spirit that led them to place the books of the Bibletogether. I can trust that God created the heavens and the placing of every thing within them, the earth with it's complexities in every form, and everything that is before my very eyes, but yet I should not trust Him that he could get the people He created to put together the Bible in the exact order He desired? Also, I am not saying that I believe all science is wrong. I do believe that some things are very true and these people are absolutely brilliant. What I am saying is that people sometimes put things out there to advance their own agendas, whether it be their own or those of a larger group. It may be done to continue the funding of their livelihoods or just as a means of flat out deception. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 ...but yet I should not trust Him that he could get the people He created to put together the Bible in the exact order He desired? He did give us free will (or rather, Adam and Eve took it from the tree of knowledge). So you trust Him to ensure that the people He created would NOT act of free will? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 I'm Catholic but I've never really understood how people decide which prohibitions are to be taken seriously. I believe Leviticus prohibits things like eating shellfish and pork and even wearing certain colors. Why are some taboos taken so seriously and some are seemingly ignored? This is easy, you ignore the ones that you believe don't apply to you or somehow make your life a little more difficult. This is human nature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 What I am saying is that people sometimes put things out there to advance their own agendas, whether it be their own or those of a larger group. It may be done to continue the funding of their livelihoods or just as a means of flat out deception. Who has a longer track record of doing this? Scientists or Heads of Religion? IMO, as Science advances, it does not have to be looked at as flying in the face of God, but rather giving us a better look at how extraordinary God is. We've proven long ago Copernicanism to be true. It doesn't mean that there is no God because he wasn't sitting on a cloud like we thought he was. It means that God is much greater than even the Church thought, and more likely greater than we can comprehend. Some can view science as blasphemous, I see it as an opportunity to prove God does exist and how great He really is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 He did give us free will (or rather, Adam and Eve took it from the tree of knowledge). So you trust Him to ensure that the people He created would NOT act of free will? No, He gave us free will. Adam and Eve exercised it to gain knowledge of good and evil, and therefore formulated original sin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 No, He gave us free will. Adam and Eve exercised it to gain knowledge of good and evil, and therefore formulated original sin. Even better. If He gave us free will, then how does one distinguish the free will of the men who put together the Bible from God's will that they put it together properly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Even better. If He gave us free will, then how does one distinguish the free will of the men who put together the Bible from God's will that they put it together properly? Youch! You cannot. In fact, I've always felt that free will is among the trickiest philosophical notions. I do not think it can be defended in any meaningful way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Even better. If He gave us free will, then how does one distinguish the free will of the men who put together the Bible from God's will that they put it together properly? The thought is that while men have the free will, they can choose to be guided by the spirit. The men responsible for Canon would have been in the second state, one would assume. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 The thought is that while men have the free will, they can choose to be guided by the spirit. The men responsible for Canon would have been in the second state, one would assume. They have free will except when they choose not to have free will? Nice circular argument. Fits in with the rest of what the Bible thumpers usually cling to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 How's it circular? If you choose to relinquish authority, haven't you made a choice, and exercised free will in doing so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted February 22, 2011 Author Share Posted February 22, 2011 How's it circular? If you choose to relinquish authority, haven't you made a choice, and exercised free will in doing so? Because it is an easy shot at believers. Ramius is like that, even though the point of you have to have faith has been hammered home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 How's it circular? If you choose to relinquish authority, haven't you made a choice, and exercised free will in doing so? Because its an argument that can be bent to fit whatever it needs to. My issues don't lie with faith or God, but with the Bible itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Because its an argument that can be bent to fit whatever it needs to. My issues don't lie with faith or God, but with the Bible itself. Well, depending on your denomination, the Bible's either a loose guide or the divinely inspired word of God. I tend toward the second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Well, depending on your denomination, the Bible's either a loose guide or the divinely inspired word of God. I tend toward the second. I simply don't see how it can be the divinely inspired word or God when it was men who decided which of the written books were more divine than others. Were the books/gospels that were excluded somehow less divinely inspired? What makes one person's account not as important as others? Not to mention that most of the bible stories/ideas are based on much much older texts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I see what you are saying and how that could be a hang-up or something that could throw people off. There is no telling the amount of time between these events and there is no telling how many children were bore by Eve before the fall. My belief is that the story of Cain and Abel is chronicled because of the circumstances that arose and they were also the first two children bore by Eve after the fall of man. They were the first two also that were bore out of the pain of labor. Also, the chronicles of the Old Testament are showing all a trail of the bloodline to Christ and not every person who lived owns a place within it's pages. Cain was of that lineage. I think it all comes down to whether you believe that the Bible is God's Word or you do not. I do not trust is the wisdom of men nor do I believe all of the scientific reports that I hear from them. There are scientists who have set out to debunk the Bible, but have ended standing along side of it. Maybe this helps, maybe it does not. Is there anything else you see in that light my friend? Your answer sounds like a load of crap to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 The thought is that while men have the free will, they can choose to be guided by the spirit. The men responsible for Canon would have been in the second state, one would assume. Want to think about that one a little bit? Your answer sounds like a load of crap to me. While I don't agree with him, it's not necessary to disparage his belief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Want to think about that one a little bit? Obviously I can't KNOW for certain. No more than anyone can know definitively about anything that old. That's why it's called faith, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Your answer sounds like a load of crap to me. That is fine my friend and we can just leave it alone at that if you like. If you have anything else that you would like to discuss though, feel free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Obviously I can't KNOW for certain. No more than anyone can know definitively about anything that old. That's why it's called faith, right? Faith in God is one thing. Faith in man is something completely different. again, i'm not arguing your faith in God. I probably share many similar beliefs. I'm arguing the fact that men were the ones to decide what got included and what didn't, most likely by how much $omeone lobbied to get their $tories included in the bible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts