I hate it how Christians attribute random events of life to "miracles."

[Cerpin Taxt]

Originally posted by: petrek

The contradiction is within your own dogma. It is a fact that an omnipotent being gets what it wants. If elsewhere in your dogma it stipulates that individuals are damned against God's will, then the inconsistency is yours, not mine.

It's also a fact that God is all knowing. The confusion is in the ignorance of man, not the knowledge of God.

Dave

And that resolves your contradiction in what way, exactly?

 

[Kev]

Originally posted by: petrek

Don't try to prove things to athiests by quoting the bible. You're wasting your time with that philosophy.

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Romans 10:13

All born again Christians are saved by hearing the word of God from a man of God, that is what the Scriptures teach, plain and simple.

Dave

Imagine how useless it would be if someone try to prove Islam to you by quoting the Koran, then maybe you'll realize how pointless quoting the bible is in this argument.

 

[petrek]

"And that resolves your contradiction in what way, exactly?"

Your argument isn't with me, I didn't write the Bible, God did. I simply believe it because I recognized 13 or so years ago that I was a wretched evil sinner who had no hope of Salvation outside of the cross and blood of Christ. Repentance is the only way to be Saved. It was more self righteous for me to go on beleiving I was smarter than an all knowing God, than to recognize I am a wretched sinner who has no hope of salvation except to turn from my evil ways to the Gospel of Jesus Christ which is the power of God unto Salvation.

Dave

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: Garth

Originally posted by: petrek

You said matter of factly that "none do"

So ye clearly contradicted the words of the only wise God and Saviour, the all powerful, the all knowing, the all present Almighty God.

The contradiction is within your own dogma. It is a fact that an omnipotent being gets what it wants. If elsewhere in your dogma it stipulates that individuals are damned against God's will, then the inconsistency is yours, not mine.

{snip self-righteous tirade}

No, only an omnipotent being with your desires gets everything he wants. Just because someone has the power to do something doesn't mean he will. Just because God may have the power to save us all doesn't mean he will. He has instead decided to leave it to use to choose which path we will take. Could he force us? Possibly. Would he force us? No.

Therefore, the only inconsistency is in your understanding of God, not in the nature of God.

 

[petrek]

"Imagine how useless it would be if someone try to prove Islam to you by quoting the Koran, then maybe you'll realize how pointless quoting the bible is in this argument."

Except that the Koran was written a few thousand years after the Torah, and 6 centuries after the Bible was completed. If you read it, you will also notice that it copies from the Bible. So it obviously can't be the Word of God

Dave

 

[TheVrolok]

I hate how agnostics know definitively that miracles do not occur or in what frequency they do occur, further more, I'll recant and then say that I hate how atheists know for sure there isn't a god. Having said that, I'm absolutely an agnostic, I was raised Roman Catholic, received Confirmation, and then like many, bounce up outta the church. I just find it amazing how many people there are in this thread that can absolutely say that this was or wasn't a miracle, or can define guidelines for what God would or would not do if he were to exist (even though they're sure he doesn't ...). All I'm saying is people have just as much of a right to believe in this or that as a miracle as you do not to do so, and to be honest, I think your whining and ranting about it is far more annoying.

 

[Kev]

Originally posted by: petrek
"Imagine how useless it would be if someone try to prove Islam to you by quoting the Koran, then maybe you'll realize how pointless quoting the bible is in this argument."

Except that the Koran was written a few thousand years after the Torah, and 6 centuries after the Bible was completed. If you read it, you will also notice that it copies from the Bible. So it obviously can't be the Word of God

Dave

So by your logic , the bible isn't the word of god because it was written thousands+ years after the torah?

 

[petrek]

So by your logic , the bible isn't the word of god because it was written thousands+ years after the torah?

The Torah is the beginning of the Bible, and I was simply pointing out the time difference from when the Bible was first started, from which the Koran copies, and also from when it was completed in comparison to when the Koran was started and completed.

Dave

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: petrek

So by your logic , the bible isn't the word of god because it was written thousands+ years after the torah?

The Torah is the beginning of the Bible, and I was simply pointing out the time difference from when the Bible was first started, from which the Koran copies, and also from when it was completed in comparison to when the Koran was started and completed.

Dave

Wouldn't it be logical for the two to be similar? They're based off the same events.

Besides, who says the Bible is complete? There are several writing that were left out, some that were even included originally and then later dropped, such as the Revelation of Peter. The Bible only contains the record of the tribes of Judah and Levi after around 600bc. What about the other tribes? Why wouldn't they continue writing as they had previously? And if they did, wouldn't their records also be considered scripture?

 

[petrek]

Wouldn't it be logical for the two to be similar? They're based off the same events.

I was simply pointing out the difference in time between when the Koran was written as opposed to when the Bible was started and also when the Bible was finished. The Bible is unique in that it was written over the span of 1500 years and penned by 40 or so different men, most of whom never met each other, yet all agree with one accord. I was simply pointing that out in my response.

Besides, who says the Bible is complete? There are several writing that were left out, some that were even included originally and then later dropped, such as the Revelation of Peter. The Bible only contains the record of the tribes of Judah and Levi after around 600bc. What about the other tribes? Why wouldn't they continue writing as they had previously? And if they did, wouldn't their records also be considered scripture?

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." 2 Timothy 3:16-17

One could also take into account how many people have tried to discredit and destroy the Word of God over the centuries using their own worldly wisdom since God first gave us His word in written form to no avail. One could also consider that the Bible is easily the top selling book of all time as a testimony to the fact that is the divinely inspired Word of God. Ultimately though, it is that the Word of God plainly states it is complete, that anyone who adds to or takes away from it will have their name taken out of the Book of Life, and that it can be used for doctrine, reproof, correction and instruction in righteousness, making a man of God perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Dave

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: petrek
I was simply pointing out the difference in time between when the Koran was written as opposed to when the Bible was started and also when the Bible was finished. The Bible is unique in that it was written over the span of 1500 years and penned by 40 or so different men, most of whom never met each other, yet all agree with one accord. I was simply pointing that out in my response.

I guess I'm still not sure how that invalidate the Quran. Since the Quran was based upon the same writing, it too would have the exact same characteristics. The only difference is interpretation and content, both of which were determined centuries after the death of Christ for both the Bible and the Quran.

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." 2 Timothy 3:16-17

One could also take into account how many people have tried to discredit and destroy the Word of God over the centuries using their own worldly wisdom since God first gave us His word in written form to no avail. One could also consider that the Bible is easily the top selling book of all time as a testimony to the fact that is the divinely inspired Word of God. Ultimately though, it is that the Word of God plainly states it is complete, that anyone who adds to or takes away from it will have their name taken out of the Book of Life, and that it can be used for doctrine, reproof, correction and instruction in righteousness, making a man of God perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Dave

The Word of God plainly states that the Revelation of John should not be added to or taken away from, and there are two reasons for that. One, because it was a complete revelations, and second, because of problems with translaters at that time who favored other religious interpretations. If I am correct, the scripture you are referring to is in the Book of Revelations, though correct me if I'm wrong. Anyone with an understanding of the Bible knows that verse has nothing to do with the Bible, but with that book alone, especially since it was not the last book written that is contained in the Bible. It wasn't even the last book written by that author.

 

[RapidSnail]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: petrek
I was simply pointing out the difference in time between when the Koran was written as opposed to when the Bible was started and also when the Bible was finished. The Bible is unique in that it was written over the span of 1500 years and penned by 40 or so different men, most of whom never met each other, yet all agree with one accord. I was simply pointing that out in my response.

I guess I'm still not sure how that invalidate the Quran. Since the Quran was based upon the same writing, it too would have the exact same characteristics. The only difference is interpretation and content, both of which were determined centuries after the death of Christ for both the Bible and the Quran.

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." 2 Timothy 3:16-17

One could also take into account how many people have tried to discredit and destroy the Word of God over the centuries using their own worldly wisdom since God first gave us His word in written form to no avail. One could also consider that the Bible is easily the top selling book of all time as a testimony to the fact that is the divinely inspired Word of God. Ultimately though, it is that the Word of God plainly states it is complete, that anyone who adds to or takes away from it will have their name taken out of the Book of Life, and that it can be used for doctrine, reproof, correction and instruction in righteousness, making a man of God perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Dave

The Word of God plainly states that the Revelation of John should not be added to or taken away from, and there are two reasons for that. One, because it was a complete revelations, and second, because of problems with translaters at that time who favored other religious interpretations. If I am correct, the scripture you are referring to is in the Book of Revelations, though correct me if I'm wrong. Anyone with an understanding of the Bible knows that verse has nothing to do with the Bible, but with that book alone, especially since it was not the last book written that is contained in the Bible. It wasn't even the last book written by that author.

The book of Revelation is the last book in the Biblical cannon. When John writes Rev. 22:18-19, he is speaking of the canon of scripture, not solely Revelation. The words "The End" after the last verse are not coincedence. They mean that God has finished his written word and anything written after Revelation and not in the canon is not part of the Bible. This includes the Apocrypha.

Therefore, Rev. 22:18-19 is a warning to those who add or remove from any book in the canon and not just Revelation.

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: RapidSnail

The book of Revelation is the last book in the Biblical cannon. When John writes Rev. 22:18-19, he is speaking of the canon of scripture, not solely Revelation. The words "The End" after the last verse are not coincedence. They mean that God has finished his written word and anything written after Revelation and not in the canon is not part of the Bible. This includes the Apocrypha.

Therefore, Rev. 22:18-19 is a warning to those who add or remove from any book in the canon and not just Revelation.

Then why did John later write the Gospel of John? You interpret that verse to mean what you think it does, even though every evidence supports that it means something entirely different. John was putting an end to the book of revelations, not the Bible. Look at the verse.

18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

Is he talking about the plagues written in a book that didn't even exist yet? NO. He was talking about the book he was currently writting and the plagues written about in the book of Revelations. And after that, he moved on to the Gospel that he wrote. If it means what you think, he's in violation of his own words.

The phrase closes the revelation, or in other words, the book that contains the revelation. The revelation is even called a book in the title.

 

[Eeezee]

In a system of ideal gas molecules confined at constant volume, if you increase the pressure, god increases the temperature! Praise jesus

 

[yhelothar]

Originally posted by: petrek

if you are going to attribute the good to god, be prepared to put the responsibility for the worlds evils on god too. deseases plagues, natural disasters, genetic defects etc cannot be explained as results of free will or some such nonsense.

Actually the worlds evils (deseases, plagues, natural disasters, genetic defects etc) which result in death (Romans 5:12 KJB, are the result of sin which is the result of free will. It is an obvious fact that we are separate from God, and being separate from God, we make choices apart from the will of God.

This is exactly what the Word of God teaches. Both that God does not want any to perish in the Lake of Fire for eternity "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." 2 Peter 3:9 KJB; "For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all." Romans 11:32 KJB; "Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time." 1 Timothy 2:6 KJB; "But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man." Hebrews 2:9 KJB; "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world." 1 John 2:2; "All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all." Isaiah 53:6 KJB,

And that it is up to each and every person to make their own choice on where they want to spend eternity "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:16 KJB; ?Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.? Acts 13:46 KJB; ?And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.? 2 Thess 2:10-12 KJB.

Dave

I didn't completely read through all your bible quotes, but it sounds like you're saying God chooses to punish those who sin(aka given free will), and diseases, plagues, natural disasters, genetic defects, etc, is the way he punishes.
But tell me this.. is there a correlation between those who gets punished and those who sin? Do miracles only happen to good christians, or does it happen equally to sinners?
Aren't there millions of people out there who kill, steal millions, cheat, lie, coerce, and get away with it? And yet, there are millions out there who follow the bible with passion, love jesus, etc, and get killed.
The fact is, there is no correlation between those who get punished and those who sin. Every christian I've talked to admitted this. Your argument is a crapshoot at best.

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: virtualgames0

I didn't completely read through all your bible quotes, but it sounds like you're saying God chooses to punish those who sin(aka given free will), and diseases, plagues, natural disasters, genetic defects, etc, is the way he punishes.
But tell me this.. is there a correlation between those who gets punished and those who sin? Do miracles only happen to good christians, or does it happen equally to sinners?
Aren't there millions of people out there who kill, steal millions, cheat, lie, coerce, and get away with it? And yet, there are millions out there who follow the bible with passion, love jesus, etc, and get killed.
The fact is, there is no correlation between those who get punished and those who sin. Every christian I've talked to admitted this. Your argument is a crapshoot at best.

There is a very distinct correlation between those who get punished and those who sin. Problem is, you're looking at it as though the only punishment possible can come about on this earth. Does everyone who suffers as a result of the sins of others deserve to suffer? No. Will justice therefore be exacted on those responsible. Absolutely. The correlation is there and I'm rather suprised that no one has commented on this to you. You have to look beyond life to see the correlation and the purposes at times, but it's always there.

 

[Jeffwo]

You only believe in miracles when you really need one?

Oh...and btw....I hate when ppl rant about Christianity in a computer hardware forum.

Jeff

 

[Leros]

Originally posted by: petrek

Don't try to prove things to athiests by quoting the bible. You're wasting your time with that philosophy.

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Romans 10:13

All born again Christians are saved by hearing the word of God from a man of God, that is what the Scriptures teach, plain and simple.

Dave

C'mon. I just said you can't quote the bible to prove stuff to an athiest. Don't use a bible quote to prove me wrong. It doesn't work that way.

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: Leros

Originally posted by: petrek

Don't try to prove things to athiests by quoting the bible. You're wasting your time with that philosophy.

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Romans 10:13

All born again Christians are saved by hearing the word of God from a man of God, that is what the Scriptures teach, plain and simple.

Dave

C'mon. I just said you can't quote the bible to prove stuff to an athiest. Don't use a bible quote to prove me wrong. It doesn't work that way.

?I do not like green eggs and ham I do not like them sam I am?

All born again Dr Seuss believers are saved by hearing the word of The Cat In The Hat from a man of the Cat, that is what Green Eggs and Ham teaches, plain and simple.

Very wise words.

 

[yhelothar]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: virtualgames0

I didn't completely read through all your bible quotes, but it sounds like you're saying God chooses to punish those who sin(aka given free will), and diseases, plagues, natural disasters, genetic defects, etc, is the way he punishes.
But tell me this.. is there a correlation between those who gets punished and those who sin? Do miracles only happen to good christians, or does it happen equally to sinners?
Aren't there millions of people out there who kill, steal millions, cheat, lie, coerce, and get away with it? And yet, there are millions out there who follow the bible with passion, love jesus, etc, and get killed.
The fact is, there is no correlation between those who get punished and those who sin. Every christian I've talked to admitted this. Your argument is a crapshoot at best.

There is a very distinct correlation between those who get punished and those who sin. Problem is, you're looking at it as though the only punishment possible can come about on this earth. Does everyone who suffers as a result of the sins of others deserve to suffer? No. Will justice therefore be exacted on those responsible. Absolutely. The correlation is there and I'm rather suprised that no one has commented on this to you. You have to look beyond life to see the correlation and the purposes at times, but it's always there.

Yes, it's true that in christianity, sinners will burn in the "Lake of Fire for eternity." However, that is not the argument. The argument is whether or not to attribute the world's evils to God also, since good is obviously being attributed to God. This is where the term miracle comes short when you consider the inconsistencies of the claim - that an equal amount of calamaties fall upon those who follow the word of God.

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: virtualgames0

Yes, it's true that in christianity, sinners will burn in the "Lake of Fire for eternity." However, that is not the argument. The argument is whether or not to attribute the world's evils to God also, since good is obviously being attributed to God. This is where the term miracle comes short when you consider the inconsistencies of the claim - that an equal amount of calamaties fall upon those who follow the word of God.

Why would you attribute all good and all evil to God? First off, there are two forces at work, not one. God is not the source of evil, Satan is, so it makes no sense if you leave him out of the discussion. Although God has allowed for certain event to occur and has allowed individuals to fall prey to the temptations of Satan, he has still provided compensation for those who are wrongfully harmed in the process. So I'm failing to see how calamites affect miracles. If you feel that since God allows such things to happen that he is an evil being, I guess that's your choice. It makes sense, but only if you don't understand the whole picture.

If I'm misinterpretting or misunderstanding, please let me know.

 

[Kev]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: virtualgames0

Yes, it's true that in christianity, sinners will burn in the "Lake of Fire for eternity." However, that is not the argument. The argument is whether or not to attribute the world's evils to God also, since good is obviously being attributed to God. This is where the term miracle comes short when you consider the inconsistencies of the claim - that an equal amount of calamaties fall upon those who follow the word of God.

Why would you attribute all good and all evil to God? First off, there are two forces at work, not one. God is not the source of evil, Satan is, so it makes no sense if you leave him out of the discussion. Although God has allowed for certain event to occur and has allowed individuals to fall prey to the temptations of Satan, he has still provided compensation for those who are wrongfully harmed in the process. So I'm failing to see how calamites affect miracles. If you feel that since God allows such things to happen that he is an evil being, I guess that's your choice. It makes sense, but only if you don't understand the whole picture.

If I'm misinterpretting or misunderstanding, please let me know.

You say satan is the source of evil, and not god. But what is the source of satan? God came first, created satan, and allows satan to exist. So then who is the ultimate source of evil?

This is one of my biggest problems with religion.

 

[yhelothar]

Originally posted by: Kev

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: virtualgames0

Yes, it's true that in christianity, sinners will burn in the "Lake of Fire for eternity." However, that is not the argument. The argument is whether or not to attribute the world's evils to God also, since good is obviously being attributed to God. This is where the term miracle comes short when you consider the inconsistencies of the claim - that an equal amount of calamaties fall upon those who follow the word of God.

Why would you attribute all good and all evil to God? First off, there are two forces at work, not one. God is not the source of evil, Satan is, so it makes no sense if you leave him out of the discussion. Although God has allowed for certain event to occur and has allowed individuals to fall prey to the temptations of Satan, he has still provided compensation for those who are wrongfully harmed in the process. So I'm failing to see how calamites affect miracles. If you feel that since God allows such things to happen that he is an evil being, I guess that's your choice. It makes sense, but only if you don't understand the whole picture.

If I'm misinterpretting or misunderstanding, please let me know.

You say satan is the source of evil, and not god. But what is the source of satan? God came first, created satan, and allows satan to exist. So then who is the ultimate source of evil?

This is one of my biggest problems with religion.

God works in mysterious ways.:roll:

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: Kev

You say satan is the source of evil, and not god. But what is the source of satan? God came first, created satan, and allows satan to exist. So then who is the ultimate source of evil?

This is one of my biggest problems with religion.

You assume that God created Satan to be an evil person. Such is your right, but is not my point of view or belief. I don't believe God created anyone to be evil, but rather gave all the choice of which to be, good or evil. Satan has every right to be evil, just as you and I do, and Satan will be punished for his crimes just as we will.

Does God allow Satan to be evil? Yes. Did God make Satan do evil things? No. There is a huge difference there. Do you allow your child to fall when he's learning to walk? Yes. Do that therefore make you responsible for him falling and any injuries he sustains in doing so? I don't think so, but maybe you care to disagree.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Kev

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: virtualgames0

Yes, it's true that in christianity, sinners will burn in the "Lake of Fire for eternity." However, that is not the argument. The argument is whether or not to attribute the world's evils to God also, since good is obviously being attributed to God. This is where the term miracle comes short when you consider the inconsistencies of the claim - that an equal amount of calamaties fall upon those who follow the word of God.

Why would you attribute all good and all evil to God? First off, there are two forces at work, not one. God is not the source of evil, Satan is, so it makes no sense if you leave him out of the discussion. Although God has allowed for certain event to occur and has allowed individuals to fall prey to the temptations of Satan, he has still provided compensation for those who are wrongfully harmed in the process. So I'm failing to see how calamites affect miracles. If you feel that since God allows such things to happen that he is an evil being, I guess that's your choice. It makes sense, but only if you don't understand the whole picture.

If I'm misinterpretting or misunderstanding, please let me know.

You say satan is the source of evil, and not god. But what is the source of satan? God came first, created satan, and allows satan to exist. So then who is the ultimate source of evil?

This is one of my biggest problems with religion.

What is evil? Seriously.


Why do all internet religious discussions end up as an argument between fundamentalist Chrisitianity and radical strong atheism? That's a false dilemma. There is far more to the philosophies of the non-measurable aspects of the human condition than just the ignorant rantings of the closed-minded.