Subject:
|
Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil? (Was Re: POV-RAY orange color (0)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 22 Aug 1999 01:05:25 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
{johnneal@uswest}NoMoreSpam{.net}
|
Viewed:
|
1336 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> John Neal wrote:
>
> > The Bible isn't a proof text. It's a collection of many different
> > traditions, most of them oral. Don't be so "Western Culture, how did it
> > happen, is it true, what are the facts".
>
> Why not? The scientific method works.
Does the scientific method help me to understand the rules of baseball? A
kind of apples and oranges situation, as it is with God and science. You
can't define something that is BY DEFINITION undefinable. Try expressing 22/7
as a decimal (I *won't* wait) It is infinite, and therefore you can't,
because you can't express the infinite in finite terms. Period. That's not
circle logic. It's a fact. Facts compute, no? ;-)
> Look at the marvels and wonders
> it's produced. What lasting contribution to human progress have those
> oral traditions given us? (1)
>
> > It's because he was more
> > than just a man, and that his message was so profound.
>
> In what way was he more than a man? (beware of circular arguments) in
> what way was his message profound?
>
> Don't you find it a bit ridiculous?
It seems ridiculous until you consider "what if it were actually true?" How
*would* you explain it? But since you *know* that I am deceived, you assume
what I say is wrong and circular. What if it is true, and the argument
*seems* circular to the limited mind? But anytime I try to pose an
explanation, you perceive it as squirming because you *know* I am wrong. You
need to open your mind a little. As an intellectual exercise, try arguing
*for* the existence of God. Forget about Christianity for a moment. If you
*did* believe that a God exists, how would *you* try to explain it?
> "I am more than a mere man. How so?
> In ways that you cannot understand. And the fact that you can't
> understand them proves my godhead. I understand them but I can't explain
> them to you because I would have to use concepts which you cannot grasp.
> So there."
>
> > > > IMO Job is one of the most interesting and honest books in the Bible.
> > >
> > > Right, because it shows the true nature of your god.
> >
> > No, Jesus revealed the true nature of God, because only Jesus knew it.
>
> If only Jesus can know it, how can he reveal it to others?
By example.
> Doesn't that
> smack you of trying to tell a blind person what sight is like? What's
> the point?
Yes and no. You're right, he won't fully understand what seeing is like. And
we will never fully understand God's nature, either. But Jesus was able to
teach us and show us about God's love in a way that we can pattern our lives.
> > Job reflects a frustration at the enigma of God.
>
> No, Job reflects the ultimate cruelty and perverseness of the Old
> Testament god. I note that most bibilical scholars agree that god seems
> to have changed between testaments. Does he love us more now than he did
> before? Are we or are we not to repudiate the OT?
God is a loving God. Our understanding of Him was a *process* which
culminated with the coming of Jesus. God doesn't change. Our perception of
him does.
> The OT god is not enigmatic, merely capricious, malicious, and self
> aggrandizing. I know those traits (especially the last one, as I have it
> myself) when I see them. Not a worthy deity for primitives to worship,
> much less supposedly educated folk like yourself. I'll take my chances
> with Satan if those are my only choices. At least he's just a thug.
God does not want your worship, groveling, etc, etc. God wants our love. And
the way we love God is by loving each other. Even in the OT God said through
the prophets that he didn't want the people's sacrifices-- but social justice.
> So get over this god of yours already.
Your God too whether you know it or not.
> 1 - other than this JudeoChristian religion, which;
> A) I don't see as progress, and
> B) is a circular argument if you make it, so don't bother.
>
> 0 - how's THAT for a subject change?
I prefer:
1)
2)
c)
-John
>
>
> --
> Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com http://my.voyager.net/lar
> - - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
> fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ Member ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to
> lugnet.
>
> NOTE: I have left CTP, effective 18 June 99, and my CTP email
> will not work after then. Please switch to my Novera ID.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
277 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
