Shuyin
Posts: 1458/1858 |
Originally posted by Vulkar
Also, priests who worked on the bible added or altered things in it to try and make it work with their own beliefs. The bible is good, but probably only about 87% accurate as far as its original form, hence the problems you'll see in it.[/quote
..Hence most people still take the bible literally....
Not many people follow every single thing in the bible. Most christians are menu christians. They'll pick what they want to believe. If it doesn't work for them, they'll ignore it.
The old testament has some really stupid things.: Like not eating hooved animals. Did you know having a christmas tree is a sin? Being homosexual is too....Oh...most people know that one.
Lord Vulkas Mormonus
Posts: 2241/4541 |
Alright, I'm taking what you say point by point, Enyulan.
I would love for you to explain why god felt is was necessary to kill (in the great flood) people who have done no wrong, such as unborn or newborn children. What about the faithful church goers? The priests and nuns? Surely not everyone god killed was evil.
I need to quickly find my copy of the bible...
" 11 The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with bviolence.
" 12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth."
First off, nuns didn't exist back then, they started appearing in the middle ages. Secondly, according to this, the world was corrupt. As for when Noah, and other prophets warned them, that is in other books, such as the Apocrypha, or the books of Moses and Abraham.
Now, the newborn children...you assume that god would send all of these people, no matter what, straight to Hell. This is not so.
In my religion, we believe that if a child dies before the age of accountability(age 8), they go to straight to heaven. Granted, nonmormons will have different opinions on this subject, but I believe that all of these unborn or young children didn't have anything bad happen to them.
I personally think if there is a higher power, he/she is in no way (or only in the most vague sense) affiliated with the Bible. There are too many inconsistencies in the Bible, and largely due to it being written/interpreted by man.
Amny inconsistancies, maybe. What I'm about to say is something that hardcore christians could want to kill me over...
The english bible has been translated and restranslated many, many times. It's been translated at least four times as far as I know. Anyone who studies an ancient foreign language, such as latin or greek, will know that it's really hard to get an exact and completely literal translation. The sentence structure, grammar, and words are completely different, so you can only come close to exactly what's correct.
During these retranslations, new things were added and altered to try and make it work, but it can be mistranslated and have mistakes. It's easy to do so.That's what I think has happened with the bible...it's not 100% true, which is why I believe in more than the bible.
Also, priests who worked on the bible added or altered things in it to try and make it work with their own beliefs. The bible is good, but probably only about 87% accurate as far as its original form, hence the problems you'll see in it. |
Enyulan
Posts: 11/17 |
I always loved getting into it with Vulkar. I"m not use to seeing people with intelligence on the side of religion. But anyways, lets keep this debate fired up.
Originally posted by Vulkar
That is an interesting number, but then, that could easily be explained...see, everyone God killed in there was bad enough to pose a threat, and need to be killed.
Originally posted by Vulkar
God has always given them a chance to repent before getting rid of them.
Originally posted by Vulkar
God killed all the bad people.
In the above quoted text, I would love for you to explain why god felt is was necessary to kill (in the great flood) people who have done no wrong, such as unborn or newborn children. What about the faithful church goers? The priests and nuns? Surely not everyone god killed was evil.
I always found this thought to be disturbing, and have asked many believers this question. Generally they cop out with either "God seen the person they would become" and even once got "God just knew what he was doing". And you can obviously fall through the holes in that logic. 
I personally think if there is a higher power, he/she is in no way (or only in the most vague sense) affiliated with the Bible. There are too many inconsistencies in the Bible, and largely due to it being written/interpreted by man. |
Siobhan.
Posts: 45/59 |
Originally posted by Elara
Poor snakes, they always get the bad reputation.
Sorry, I had to say that... snakes are cute.
FINALLY some serpent love. dude i wish so bad that i was a parseltongue.
sorry off topic but i could not resist. |
Elara
Posts: 4404/9736 |
Poor snakes, they always get the bad reputation.
Sorry, I had to say that... snakes are cute. |
Lord Vulkas Mormonus
Posts: 2128/4541 |
Originally posted by Elara
Oh, and what about the flood? I thought that Noah was the only person with prior warning on that one.
No, Noah went out preaching, as did many other prophet, telling the people that they would all be destroyed unless they repented. They didn't, so they died.
Originally posted by Shuyin
Oh...remember when God killed the first born child of everyone that didn't put the lamb's blood on their door?
Yeah....Curious on how you can spin that in a good way.
Yeah, I think I can spin it in a good way. You're a catholic, so I think that you know what I'm about to say. Regardless, for the sake of other people...
The egyptians, at the time, were holding thousands of jews in slavery. Moses, a jew that was raised as an egyptian, was the prophet chosen to free the people. Many curses were put onto the people, but the slaves were still not freed.
Finally, God did a final, crippling strike. He killed the firstborn son of every egyptian family. They had several warnings, several curses beforehand, and yet they still held these people in slavery. So yeah, I do think that killing those people for freedom was justified. If it saved a civilization from slavery, I'd gladly kill a few people for it.
Originally posted by Nagis
Studies say that the Serpant was Satan himself, due to the fact that Temptation is a sin
I know that's how it's explained, and I believe it also. However, after looking at Genesis, it doesn't exactly say that the snake is Satan.
My personal philosophy is that the snake was merely a servant of Satan. Since a third of heaven was kicked out, wouldn't these angels help with temptations too? Or, if not them, couldn't they have corrupted the snake, until it worked for them? Even posessing the snake is possible, if you think about it.
But if you have any more light to shed on this topic, I'd be glad to see it. |
Elara
Posts: 4400/9736 |
I know the story of the fall of Lucifer. I just don't see how the snake is Satan. Maybe working for Satan... I don't know. |
Shuyin
Posts: 1441/1858 |
Yeah. I think I was taught that the snake was indeed the devil.
Oh...remember when God killed the first born child of everyone that didn't put the lamb's blood on their door?
Yeah....Curious on how you can spin that in a good way. |
Bitmap
Posts: 4259/7838 |
Originally posted by Elara
No, I think that the snake was just something else. At least they don't call the snake Satan.
This may sound confusing, but Ill word this as best as I can.
Satan used to be a beautiful angel, full of music and light beyond comprehension, however he wanted to take the throne, so God shot him down to Earth in a bolt of Lightning, as well as a third of the angels.
During this time, there was no sin on Earth. Adam and Eve did not know what being nude was until the Serpant, also known as Temptation, told them to eat the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge.
Studies say that the Serpant was Satan himself, due to the fact that Temptation is a sin.
So I think the Snake was Satan. Its also a good story IMO. |
Elara
Posts: 4397/9736 |
No, I think that the snake was just something else. At least they don't call the snake Satan.
Oh, and what about the flood? I thought that Noah was the only person with prior warning on that one.
And actually I wasn't being sarcastic on my last post, I admit that I do not have a lot of factual knowledge about Christianity and that is partially because I've never read it past the beginning. The list of who begot who puts me to sleep. |
Shuyin
Posts: 1438/1858 |
Wasn't the snake in Adam and Eve, Satan? Is there a difference between the devil, Satan, Lucifer? Aren't they all the same?
I grew up Catholic. Went through 8 years of Catechism and such. But I'm not really partial to Catholicism anymore. |
venomouslobster
Posts: 440/444 |
From what i recall random death and slaughtery badness is not what the satan of the bible is all about. He seems to be much more like a disgruntled car salesman than anything else. |
Lord Vulkas Mormonus
Posts: 2103/4541 |
Originally posted by Elara
I don't remember Satan being mentioned with Cain and Abel, I know that is how it is explained, but in the Bible that I read it just says he slew him out of jealousy or something.
I read the story yesterday, and yeah, you're right. Sorry about that.
Anyway, Isaiah at least talks about Satan(called Lucifer in Isaiah), and how he attempts to corrupt man and will be thrown into the depths of Hell at the end of this world.
Logos, if we followed the philosophy that only God could know anything related to God, there would hardly be any debate, would there?
Now, in every story about God killing people that I know of, he sent a prophet to warn the people before killing them. It happened with Jerusalem being captured by Babylon, it happened with Sodom and Gamorrah, it happened with the Egyptians...
God has always given them a chance to repent before getting rid of them. |
Logos
Posts: 583/641 |
I was just saying that most people who claim to be speaking in lieu of God have some sort of evidence or ethos on their side. Unless you can present God to affirm you, that is. 
Simply, your argument isn't self-explanatory and someone might just as easily say God hates people and kills those he doesn't like. Nothing personal. |
geeogree
Posts: 206/246 |
you don't think? well, add some more talking to that thinking or your counter-argument is pretty weak |
Logos
Posts: 580/641 |
Originally posted by Elara
But yeah... I've never been able to get past Genesis, so my "hard facts o' Biblical knowledge" is not a big list.
Do I sense an ounce of sarcasm?
Originally posted by geeogree
As for the people that God killed: 1) We are his creations and are supposed to live by his laws. 2) I see nothing wrong with getting rid of the people that have no chance of getting to heaven. Leaves some space for the rest of us 3) I don't think God kills anyone without first providing some warning. Come up with a story if you can but I think this holds true.
I don't think this claim is very theologically sound. |
geeogree
Posts: 205/246 |
hrm.... I find that Satan number hard to agree with. I didn't have time to read every post but as far as I'm concerned Satan can't kill someone because he doesn't have a physical body to do it.
You could argue murder via posession but that's really impossible to verify.
As for the people that God killed: 1) We are his creations and are supposed to live by his laws. 2) I see nothing wrong with getting rid of the people that have no chance of getting to heaven. Leaves some space for the rest of us 3) I don't think God kills anyone without first providing some warning. Come up with a story if you can but I think this holds true.
|
Elara
Posts: 4364/9736 |
I don't remember Satan being mentioned with Cain and Abel, I know that is how it is explained, but in the Bible that I read it just says he slew him out of jealousy or something.
But yeah... I've never been able to get past Genesis, so my "hard facts o' Biblical knowledge" is not a big list. |
| This is a long thread. Click here to view it. | |
), being that everyone has so many disputes over it.