MERGED: God (all threads)

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Flubflow

Truth is not subjective. How can it be? It it was then, for a start, we would have no justice system. Truth is truth. Lies are lies. To determine whether something is one or the other then you rely on evidence and empirical data. A faith or belief is not truth.

Truth in court is what a jury believes it is, therefore it's subjective to them.

Originally Posted by Flubflow

If you are not afraid then why do you reject it out of hand? Scientists were feared by religious types so much that they burned at the stake. Today you just mostly ignore them when it suits you.

Wow, generalisation or what! I don't reject it out of hand - some of the greatest scientists in the past were Christians, such as Isaac Newton. It's just when science says "50 million years ago this happened" I often wonder who was there to record it. Now if they said "50 million years ago WE BELIEVE this happened", I'd be much happier man


PS Towny's back - good to see the calvery's arrived

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Russ D

Let's not forget that the Bible wasn't "the Bible" during those days. It only became considered the written word of God well after Jesus left.

You're doing a really good job of destroying the credability of the bible Russ!


PS Yay Towny's here

[ntluser]

Originally Posted by Nor

Still don't understand really the whole thing about jesus being a jew and christian stuff I'm afraid.

As Russ said Christians accept Jesus as their Saviour and follow his teachings just as Buddhists accept Buddha as their saviour and follow his teachings. His nationality does not affect that fact.

Jesus offered the people of the time a fresh perspective to that offered by the priests, who clung to the letter of the scriptures rather than to their spirit.

He offered a way of living embracing respect for God, self-sacrifice, forgiveness, tolerance, helping others and many other virtues. He did not claim his religion to be the best but offered all the people he encountered the opportunity to embrace the values he advocated and to live by them.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

You're doing a really good job of destroying the credability of the bible Russ!

That's not my intention - God is fully aware that what He tried to teach us in the OT didn't work - we wouldn't obey. To me the OT is a recording of the status quo. I don't think ALL of it was like this though - in fact I believe the majority of it, but us being what we are, we failed and it's recorded in the OT.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Russ D

That's not my intention - God is fully aware that what He tried to teach us in the OT didn't work - we wouldn't obey. To me the OT is a recording of the status quo. I don't think ALL of it was like this though - in fact I believe the majority of it, but us being what we are, we failed and it's recorded in the OT.

Either the OT is the word of god, telling us how to behave, or it's made up by the people who wrote it, in which case, following it would be as bad as not following it, as neither is the way god wanted. (actually not following it would be better as there's the small chance you could accidently live the life god wanted you to be)
The problem I've raised is nothing to do with whether we'd follow what the bible says or not, it's whether what the bible says is actually what god wanted.
If it isn't then it was just made up by blokes (and one woman) with good, but flawed, intentions, claiming that they were working for god, when they were actually spreading lies (ie not what god was saying).
In which case, the OT has no credibility when it comes to the claim that it is about the way god wanted us to behave.
And if the OT is like that, who's to say that the NT isn't also like that? Written by men with good but flawed intentions, claiming they are writing about how god wants us to behave.

[Nor]

Originally Posted by ntluser

As Russ said Christians accept Jesus as their Saviour and follow his teachings just as Buddhists accept Buddha as their saviour and follow his teachings. His nationality does not affect that fact.

Jesus offered the people of the time a fresh perspective to that offered by the priests, who clung to the letter of the scriptures rather than to their spirit.

He offered a way of living embracing respect for God, self-sacrifice, forgiveness, tolerance, helping others and many other virtues. He did not claim his religion to be the best but offered all the people he encountered the opportunity to embrace the values he advocated and to live by them.

Its not his nationality though, its his religion. He was Jewish ? I appreciate everything you are saying but I just see abit of a contradiction basing your religious beliefs on Jesus but not believing in Jesus' religion.

[Russ]

Either the OT is the word of god, telling us how to behave, or it's made up by the people who wrote it

It's neither! These people were inspired by their experiences of God to write. He did not make the parchment and ink appear, neither did he dabble with dictation (apart from Revelations, so to speak), he just spoke through people. It would be like me writing about my expereinces with Him and how I feel He lives in me and wants me to help others.

Now humans being humans, we are prone to error. This may or may not have happened in the OT. There are some who follow the Bible to the letter of the law, that's up to them.

The problem I've raised is nothing to do with whether we'd follow what the bible says or not, it's whether what the bible says is actually what god wanted.

I believe it is, when you discount human error.

And if the OT is like that, who's to say that the NT isn't also like that? Written by men with good but flawed intentions, claiming they are writing about how god wants us to behave

The difference with the NT, especially the Gospels, is that we had someone on earth to check things were correct and in order with.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Nor

Its not his nationality though, its his religion. He was Jewish ? I appreciate everything you are saying but I just see abit of a contradiction basing your religious beliefs on Jesus but not believing in Jesus' religion.

Think of Jesus' religion as being a true jew.
the other jews at the time had got it wrong, hence why he went to the temple and gave them a piece of his mind.
so christianity (in the form that jesus preached) is really judaism.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Think of Jesus' religion as being a true jew.
the other jews at the time had got it wrong, hence why he went to the temple and gave them a piece of his mind.
so christianity (in the form that jesus preached) is really judaism.

In a sense this is true - the born-again people of God are called the 'true Israel' and 'children of Abraham' countless times in the Bible. However while it might be technically correct, in general conversation it would probably confuse a lot of people.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

so christianity (in the form that jesus preached) is really judaism.

Well....from a sideways view possibly!

[Nor]

Did Jesus renounce Judaiasm then and become a Christian ? Also why do Jews believe in Jesus if he said their version was wrong ?

Originally Posted by Xaccers

PS Yay Towny's here

You didn't think I could stay away did you? My old operation scar always starts to throb when there's a good old nthw religious thread brewing

Actually I've been busier these last few weeks than I ever have, and there's more to come for the next couple of months ... I'll drop in when I can, but it's nice to be missed!

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Russ D

It's neither! These people were inspired by their experiences of God to write. He did not make the parchment and ink appear, neither did he dabble with dictation (apart from Revelations, so to speak), he just spoke through people. Now humans being humans, we are prone to error. This may or may not have happened in the OT. There are some who follow the Bible to the letter of the law, that's up to them.

So god wasn't that bothered that these people were getting his teachings wrong?
If so, why send jesus to sort it all out? Why not send gabriel to correct them as they made the mistake?
Unless of course, he didn't know they were getting it wrong...

Originally Posted by Russ

The difference with the NT, especially the Gospels, is that we had someone on earth to check things were correct and in order with.

But if the bible is known for being made up by people with good intentions, and you are using the bible as the basis that jesus was sent by god, then your basis is flawed, as in all likelyhood, jesus was just another man making things up with good intentions (I don't recall any roman writings actually acknowledging his miracles, even if they do acknowledge he existed).
After all, if god felt that the mistakes were big enough for jesus to have to come and correct them, and what a major correction his teachings were!, then why wait so long before the end of OT for him to arrive?

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by towny

You didn't think I could stay away did you? My old operation scar always starts to throb when there's a good old nthw religious thread brewing

Actually I've been busier these last few weeks than I ever have, and there's more to come for the next couple of months ... I'll drop in when I can, but it's nice to be missed!

We do miss you Towny, these threads just aren't the same without the input from both you and Russ

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Nor

Did Jesus renounce Judaiasm then and become a Christian ? Also why do Jews believe in Jesus if he said their version was wrong ?

Didn't renounce it, just tried to correct it.
Think of jesus as the master weight used by the trading standards people.
It goes to a fruit stall at the local market and tests their scales to see if they are showing 1Kg of fruit as 1Kg.
If they aren't, the stall owner corrects the faulty scales so that they are brought inline with the master weight.