Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
I hate to revive this thread, petrek... but I don't see how Moonie is incorrect in this.
You're basically requiring that God conform to your individual belief of Him. That God must be what you think He must be... or else. That's not faith. Faith is "His Will be done, on earth as it is in Heaven." Faith is being damned and still praising God....
Not only am I correct, I am also very kind. I told petrek what I told him in case he ever looses the false faith he has and stands in danger too of loosing faith in God. God doesn't depend on petrek's faith to exist. That is arrogance, ego, to say how God must be. petrek creates a sense of his self importance when he defines God. He doesn't notice that he does so to cover a feeling that he is small. We run so hard from how small we feel, but it is the meek, the broken and the small who find God, no?
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
Hmm... let's not get a big head, eh Moonie? I agree with you on the arrogance of seeking to control God (which is foolish as well), but some of the wealthiest and/or most powerful people I know are also very devout (and I know quite a few of these). Not what I would call meek, broken, or small.
Back on topic with this thread
, who else here knew that one of the greatest biologists of our time, George Washington Carver, was also an extremely devout Christian who lived a very modest life, never married, and credited all his many accomplishments to God?Hehe, not if devotion only meant something your point might have some meaning. Unfortunately, one can be deeply devoted to anything. I don't think it was the rich and devoted that Jesus ministered to.Originally posted by: Vic
Hmm... let's not get a big head, eh Moonie? I agree with you on the arrogance of seeking to control God (which is foolish as well), but some of the wealthiest and/or most powerful people I know are also very devout (and I know quite a few of these). Not what I would call meek, broken, or small.
Back on topic with this thread
No worries mate, I posed the question to you and others for a reason, I wanted to understand your reasoning on the issue. I knew that if you didn't address it in this thread, another thread would eventually find it's way to this issue...
The reason why you don't see him as incorrect is because all he said was that I was incorrect, and I was originally disagreeing with your post...so it's to be expected that you agree with yourself
Of course God must conform to my knowledge of him based on the Scriptures (The Bible), I'd be insane to put someone else's reasoning above my own. There is no way for me to reasonably defend a conclusion that isn't my own, that wasn't based on my knowledge and understanding. Basing your beliefs on someone else's conclusions, whether it be a teacher, parent, pastor, or friend, is what causes dogmatic disagreements. The person doesn't know what he/she believes, only what they've been told by said mentor, so they can't reasonably defend their position, they can only repeat what they've heard. Sad and depressing, but all too common.
Now on to the discussion.
It is your belief that the Bible is not meant to be taken literally, more precisely that a day in Genesis, used with the words morning, evening, and the addition of one number per day (was the first day, was the second day, etc) was not meant as a normal day. You base your conclusion on the fact that we don't know everything, and that therefore we shouldn't assume to know (correct me if that is not your position).
I don't take that approach, as I don't see how any logical or reasonable conclusion can be reached if one is to take the position that anything is possible. Of course anything IS possible, but what bearing does imaginary hypothesises have to do with reality as it currently is...nothing.
I base my conclusions on what is known, not on what is unknown, and for that matter may never be known. That's a fools world, a world of insanity, a world that simply doesn't exist.
How important is one's view of the Scriptures (The Bible)? I say really important. I was born in the 70's, the 1970's to be exact. What does the signify, it signifies that I was born approximately 1970 years after Christ, the Christ that is found in the pages of that Bible. It is that Bible that represents the oldest known Book, circa 1500BC, 1500 years Before Christ is when Moses penned the first 5 books of the Bible. The Bible contains a Historical account of the Jewish people, yes, those Jews. Those Jews that outlived their enemies, and their captives. Those Jews, that 70 years after their Messiah, a Messiah that most of them have rejected, were dispersed across the World, and now, 1900 odd years later, have returned to their Biblical homeland as predicted by that Bible. Those Jews from that Middle East that occupy so much of the World's attention. Those Jews, the Bible's Jews, Yahweh's Jews.
So the question to you is, how do you reason to me that while Moses used the word day in correlation with a morning, an evening, and a single addition (first day, second day...) what he really meant was indeterminate amount of time? Why would any author intentionally mislead the reader at the beginning of a book? What would be the purpose on such an obvious deception?
Later...
Dave
Well, if we're taking the Bible literally:
As far as I know, when Genesis speaks of a 'day', there is no reference as to whether that is one of God's days or one of Earth's days. If one day on Earth can be 1000 years to the Lord, and a day to the Lord can be 1000 years on earth, isn't it equally likely that each day in Genesis is one of God's days, which represents 1000 years on the Earth he was creating?
I guess my point is that it's difficult to take all of the Bible literally, because you'll run into contradictions. The Bible just seems to be interpreted, not taken literally.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
My interpretation is that God has never lied to us, we simply fail to understand... time after time.
Beyond the 1000 years as 1 day references, I believe that the days in the Creation story represent Godly divisions of time as translated to something that could be understood by more primitive humans. Human existence is linear, but fractured into individual days. God was simply telling us that He created the world in 6 parts of time. Is it deception when you speak to a child in a manner that the child can understand? Of course not. And with all honesty, does it really matter just how long each of those parts of time were? No.
And petrek, I wasn't asking you to put someone else's reasoning above your own. But I am asking you to put your own reasoning above everything else. In other words, that you seek to find God in your heart, and not in a book. The book is just your guide. The faith and love that you need to serve God can only be found within yourself.
If a billion years is as a single day to God, then so be it. His will be done, not mine.
Anyway, I've said it before, I'll say it again. Fixating on the Creation story is for those who never made it to the Gospels. Is there any philosophy as beautiful and true and as practical as the teachings of Jesus? Not that I have ever found...
Beyond the 1000 years as 1 day references, I believe that the days in the Creation story represent Godly divisions of time as translated to something that could be understood by more primitive humans. Human existence is linear, but fractured into individual days. God was simply telling us that He created the world in 6 parts of time. Is it deception when you speak to a child in a manner that the child can understand? Of course not. And with all honesty, does it really matter just how long each of those parts of time were? No.
And petrek, I wasn't asking you to put someone else's reasoning above your own. But I am asking you to put your own reasoning above everything else. In other words, that you seek to find God in your heart, and not in a book. The book is just your guide. The faith and love that you need to serve God can only be found within yourself.
If a billion years is as a single day to God, then so be it. His will be done, not mine.
Anyway, I've said it before, I'll say it again. Fixating on the Creation story is for those who never made it to the Gospels. Is there any philosophy as beautiful and true and as practical as the teachings of Jesus? Not that I have ever found...
Here, Vic, try this on for size. Might help you to understand the reasons behind the symbolism in the OT:
Documentary Hypothesis
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rs/2/Judaism/jepd.html
And more detail behind that:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_tora1.htm
Documentary Hypothesis
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rs/2/Judaism/jepd.html
And more detail behind that:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_tora1.htm
Very interesting links. Thanks. I always did find it a bit odd that the creation story was told...and then immediately told again.
Ayup. Check out Who Wrote the Bible? - Richard Elliott Friedman
It goes into much more detail into the construction of the early books of the Old Testament and the social/economic/political conditions that formed the content and the biases of the works.
It goes into much more detail into the construction of the early books of the Old Testament and the social/economic/political conditions that formed the content and the biases of the works.
"Of course God must conform to my knowledge of him based on the Scriptures (The Bible), I'd be insane to put someone else's reasoning above my own. There is no way for me to reasonably defend a conclusion that isn't my own, that wasn't based on my knowledge and understanding. Basing your beliefs on someone else's conclusions, whether it be a teacher, parent, pastor, or friend, is what causes dogmatic disagreements. The person doesn't know what he/she believes, only what they've been told by said mentor, so they can't reasonably defend their position, they can only repeat what they've heard. Sad and depressing, but all too common."
You have found a god for your ego, but if you want to find God you have to die to your self. This is what it means to surrender to the will of God, no? You can find God only on His terms, not your own. You can dictate nothing. Something to keep in the back of your mind in the unlikely event that you start to think and question.
You have found a god for your ego, but if you want to find God you have to die to your self. This is what it means to surrender to the will of God, no? You can find God only on His terms, not your own. You can dictate nothing. Something to keep in the back of your mind in the unlikely event that you start to think and question.
And I'll respond by quoting my original post that lead to this discussion, which can be found further up this page (if you are using 50 posts per page)
If by god you mean God, than a day to him is like a thousand years, and a thousand years is like a day...in other words, God exists outside of the Universe he created, and thus is outside of time.
What a day is to God is not the same as what a day is in reference to Genesis. Genesis, and in fact the whole Bible, is not meant for God's understanding of man, but rather for man's understanding of God, himself, and the universe in which we exist.
Dave
Even though our understanding of who God is is different, we do agree that God is incapable of lying, due to his nature.
If we, man, weren't capable of understanding a difference in time, we wouldn't be on different sides of the issue. I know as a matter of fact that Moses, who wrote the first five books of the Bible, could easily have used other words to describe the time frame he meant. The fact is he used the words day, evening, morning in association with an increment of a number (first day, second day...) for a reason.
If God could be found in the heart of man, than God would not have given us the Bible. I know my heart, and my heart is desperately wicked, it wishes that I please myself, and myself alone. God wishes that I please Him, and Him alone.
Trust my heart, a heart that is desperately wicked and deceitful above all things? No thanks, I'd rather trust the Word of God, the two-edged sword that is capable of piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit.
Whose fixating on the creation story? I'm trying to have a reasonable dialogue in regards to the first chapter (book) of the Bible. If the first chapter of a book is misunderstood, then the rest of the book is going to be misunderstood.
Moses was a man who wrote the first five chapters of the oldest known book (as I believe via the guidance of God), and thus was very capable of expressing various time periods as noted by his use of various time based words throughout those first five books. So the my question remains, what possible reason would Moses have for intentionally using words that refer to one earthly day if what he really meant was not one earthly day, as he obviously had access to words to denote other amounts of time based on his use of those words in the books he wrote?
Dave
"If God could be found in the heart of man, than God would not have given us the Bible. I know my heart, and my heart is desperately wicked, it wishes that I please myself, and myself alone. God wishes that I please Him, and Him alone.
Trust my heart, a heart that is desperately wicked and deceitful above all things? No thanks, I'd rather trust the Word of God, the two-edged sword that is capable of piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit."
Isn't it in interesting that the thing that was meant to free us can so easily become our prison. Truth is always 180 degrees from where we look. We are the prisoners of our assumptions. That is why it helps to know that you know nothing and why the meek have such an advantage.
Trust my heart, a heart that is desperately wicked and deceitful above all things? No thanks, I'd rather trust the Word of God, the two-edged sword that is capable of piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit."
Isn't it in interesting that the thing that was meant to free us can so easily become our prison. Truth is always 180 degrees from where we look. We are the prisoners of our assumptions. That is why it helps to know that you know nothing and why the meek have such an advantage.
So, without complete and literal faith in the Bible, you're saying you would fall to the wicked and deceitful desires of your heart? Just curious, but what exactly are those wicked desires? Do you know what they are, or is it just that Catholicism has told you that your heart is wicked?
Jeremiah 17:9 "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked..."
No, even if I didn't believe the Bible, I would still pay attention to the possible loss of freedom that comes from breaking the law. The law is different in different countries. And during war time laws are nearly non-existant, allowing for the thieving, maiming, abusing, and killing of other men with impunity. Why is it that the average man can commit heineous crimes against he fellow man (a person who did him no wrong) during war time? His wicked and deceitful heart that was kept in check because of laws that threatened his freedom and life if they were broken. Take away the threat of penalty for your crimes, and the "crime rate" explodes. A review of any of the numerous ongoing wars would verify this.
Nonetheless, were getting away from the question. What reason would Moses have for intentionally deceiving his fellow man?
Dave
For one, I wasn't talkinga about man in general. I was specifically asking you about your wicked and deceitful heart. I don't know about you, but I lead a decent life because I like it. I don't not commit crime because it's against the law, I don't commit crime because I have no desire to. I don't sit awake at night thinking how if only there wasn't a law against this or that then I could go right ahead and do it. Granted, some people are different, but I wasn't asking about them. I was asking about you.
Now, about Moses. We have no way of knowing Moses' motives in the words he chose. We can't know if he was being literal, using literary license, or trying to deceive us. It's all in how you interpret the bible. An allegory isn't a deception, is it?
Jeremiah 17:9 "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked..."
Our understanding is 180 degrees from the truth. Evil exists because as children we were punished for certain behaviors and taught that they and thus we are evil. Our egos shield us by pretending that we are good and blocking these experiences from conscious memory. Thus the evil, really only the mistaken feeling that we are evil is deeply repressed within. Rules and law and punishment, then are the ways that we keep these feelings repressed and under control. But the purpose of real religion and the reason that we are forgiven is that our sins are only bad feelings that we are worthless sinners, feelings that are factually lies. He who really experiences real forgiveness has his heart cleansed of these illusions and is free to experience real love. Chances are good that you have never met anybody in such a condition.
At this point, in fairness to a reasoned discussion, the obvious must be stated that there is no evidence (that I know of) that God exists or existed or anything in-between. Quite unlike evolution, I might add.
God (whichever one you like) is (are) in-fact an assumption. An assumption based on no evidence.
This is the essence of faith. I think we all know this, but some folks get confused in the mix.
As to Moses (probabily more than a myth-- akin to legend, but culture can be substituted if desired): Truth and its interpretation are axiomatic to the culture and to the age of judging. The criterion for assessing God as reality for Moses was probably an attempt to negate the forces and ravages of nature (and likely man, as natural beings). To make the universe amenable. I think that is the way Chassidic Rebbes teach it, if I remember correctly.
God (whichever one you like) is (are) in-fact an assumption. An assumption based on no evidence.
This is the essence of faith. I think we all know this, but some folks get confused in the mix.
As to Moses (probabily more than a myth-- akin to legend, but culture can be substituted if desired): Truth and its interpretation are axiomatic to the culture and to the age of judging. The criterion for assessing God as reality for Moses was probably an attempt to negate the forces and ravages of nature (and likely man, as natural beings). To make the universe amenable. I think that is the way Chassidic Rebbes teach it, if I remember correctly.
Except that you and Rebbes know nothing. Try to see that your belief that God is an assumption is your assumption. You have no idea what the God-Realized know, no idea at all.
OK, OK, OK....
So I'm not 100% sure that Moses was trying to make the Universe more amenable.
I'll go back to Charlton Heston version.
You happy now, sarcasmo-subtle-sufficientrarity-gibber boy?
3chordcharlie
Diamond Member
- Mar 30, 2004
- 9,859
- 1
- 81
This thread now has a postcount 15X as high as the guy that started it...
mattsaccount for elite!
mattsaccount for elite!
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter