MS Fowler One thing you all forget when you state your conundrum that an all-loving god couldn't/ wouldn't allow bad things to happen---You forget that man was not alone in the Garden; there was another being present. Yes but still if god is all knowing and all loving and ALL powerful again why didn't he/she stop it then/now? Seems to me its one or the other either all knowing or all loving or all powerful certainly not all of them....

You also act as if God can be required to do what you think he should; that somehow he is accountable to you. If not me then who? He/she certainly doesn't give a crap about his/her children as he/she claims...just look around you
IF there is a Creator who made everything that exists by the mere speaking it into existence--do you think such a being would be accountable to you--you mere speck of mud? mere speck of mud huh?
Now you may decide not to believe in such a Creator0--that is certainly your moral choice. Rational choice is i belive what you might have meant

But your decision to not believe does not make God not exist, just as my belief does not cause Him to exist. Correct its a total lack of evidence that makes him not exist
He is exactly what His name means, " The Self-Existent One". God's existence is quite outside of our ability to impact it. He either does, or does not exist totally independent of what any of us want to be true, or believe to be true. There is a chance that you all are right, and that I am wrong, and simply believe something I have been conditioned to believe.
But, if you are honest, you must admit that there is a chance that you are the ones who have been blinded, and cannot see. No I see quite clearly not one shred of evidence to support his/her existence....
But if such a Creator exists, does He not have the right to act according to His nature? Sure is a convenient way to explain the inaction your creator chooses
Does the potter not have the right over the clay--to make whatever he chooses? Yes the potter does but last time I checked i am made or mostly water and minerals......Or does the clay speak back to the potter, saying, " Why have you made me thus?"

It is not my intention to argue you into heaven. I only desire to answer the questions I see posted. Some of the arguments display quite a remarkable ignorance of what the Bible actually teaches. Some don't.
I understand your position. You chose to not believe.
We disagree; I hope agreeably so.

This conversation always leads no where......no one can see past their bible

[QUOTE=kerry;2284883][QUOTE=Matt L;2284832]God dictated to Moses.

Let me elaborate just a bit.

I am old enough to remember the last time "everybody" knew Moses didn't write the Pentateuch. It was believed by all experts that Moses couldn't have written it because writing did not exist in Moses' time. Whoops --archeology proved the experts wrong on that one.

Are you a follower of the Welhausen school? I remember studying that--just did not make sense to assume that different names for God meant different authors. Context always seemed a better reason to explain the various names of God, at least to me.

[QUOTE=MS Fowler;2285750][QUOTE=kerry;2284883]Nobody who does not accept the supernatural authority of the text itself, thinks that there is reliable historical evidence that Moses wrote the Pentateuch.

[QUOTE=kerry;2285904][QUOTE=MS Fowler;2285750]I would probably agree with you on that.

Not much for you to agree with in this perspective:

The Bible is a lot of things to a lot of people, but to Christians, especially, it is a source of inspiration and a guide to daily living.
To others, the Bible is a historical document and a source of controversy.
To others still, the Bible is a self-contradictory mish-mash of arcane rules and proscriptions, mostly relevant to long-dead cultures in far away places.What is the truth in all of this?
The reality is that it is all true to an extent, and equally nonsensical at the same time. The Bible has meaning to all its readers, but it is important to consider that the meaning it has is informed by the prejudices the reader brings to it.

http://www.bidstrup.com/bible.htm

You need to fix the quote tags up there, Tonk. It about looks like I said things that I didn't.

And my comparison of Nuit giving divine revelation to Crowley was omitted.

i have deleted my message. my apologies. elvis has left the building. :)

[QUOTE=MS Fowler;2285916][QUOTE=kerry;2285904]I really don't understand why people on the conservative end of the religious spectrum get their shorts in a knot over the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch or other obscure arguments about who wrote what in the Bible. If it's a divinely inspired document it could have been written by Fred Flintstone without making any difference at all from a logical point of view. The issue is strictly traditional attribution of authorship which seems to prove that conservative religious believers are not really committed to the textual authority of the Scripture, but to conservative cultural and religious beliefs in general.

Look at Matt. He thinks the OT was written in Greek yet such a factual error has no effect on his ability to turn the text into a fetish.

[QUOTE=kerry;2286469][QUOTE=MS Fowler;2285916]Mosaic authorship is more important than simple tradition. In the Gospels, Jesus attributes the books to Moses. That ends the discussion, or we have the problem of Jesus speaking error.

Or could it be that the Divine Incarnate thought that a long dissertation on JDEP was a little onerous for his audience, just like he didn't go into a explanation of the germ theory of disease.

Why would he introduce a fable like that?

If there is a spiritual value in the bible, it's in that question.

bump

There are No Atheists in Fox-Holes!

Reject science and embrace Jesus because science doesn't have all the answers, pretzel logic at its finest.

Some atheists common sense.

http://www.chrisbeach.co.uk/viewQuotes.php

O'Reilly doesn't do a very good job of faking religion. He needs to study Robertson, Falwell, or Swaggart to appear more authentic.

Religion provides answers to the questions. Science may or may not have answers to your questions AT THIS TIME. So, the question is whether you are willing to embrace an answer just because it is an answer or you are willing to hold out and may never find the answer. If you so desperately need an answer, right or wrong, religion is the ticket.

Religion also explains death....

What you state is, logically possible.

It is also logically possible that there is a true religion that gives true answers, and is not an invention .

Now that you mention it, I don't think it is possible. Truth in science is a matter of investigation and inquiry. Truth in a revealed religion is something entirely different as it is accepted on authority. So religions with revealed 'truth' aren't really an equal alternative to science, giving 'true' answers in the same way that science gives true answers.

True but there is no real way to find out so you can prove it does or does not. So what are you left with? Besides "Believe or Don't Believe"?

But it could possibly, maybe not probably but certainly possibly, hit on a right answer. Isn't it like they say that a blind squirrel will find a nut now and then?