Umm, there is no written record in existence pre religious doctrine, so I am not sure what you are looking for.


However, in Egyptian, Chinese, and Mayan society, slaves were buried with their masters, sometimes while still being alive.

Would you agree then that Christianity is not about morality but rather about belief?

Actually, not all Christian sects believe children don't go to hell; in fact, until recently, Catholics had a very special place for unbaptised children in hell (Limbo, that is).

Don't you think that you could be putting the fate of your immortal soul on a bunch of dead guys who made some brisk (And fallible) decisions about which books were "Bible material" and weren't? How is acceptance in any way related to truth, for that matter? The fact that people believe in something doesn't make it true.
Is God then more concerned about what you believe in than about whether an innocent child suffers or not?

Except, why should God expect us to stand up to his level, and then make us fallible and give us imperfect information? How does putting humanity on a rigged contest work with being benevolent? Most people on Earth aren't Christians, and I would argue one has a less than fair chance to get into heaven (Matter of fact, Jesus says so). Furthermore, why are we more important than people who lived before Jesus, and thus had no easy way out into salvation? How is that in any conceivable way fair? What kind of jury-rigged, sadistic game show is that? Particularly, it seems conveniently designed to make the "saved" feel superiour.

How is that fair?
Why would a God create an universe that forcibly limitates the information we can have, and then makes a sin out of ignorance? How does that relate to free will? Is a man who "ignores" his loved ones ' cries for help because he can't hear them evil?

How is it fair that an omnipotent deity expects his admittedly fallible creations to live up to his standards? Why exactly is murdering his own son necessary to change the rules of the game so it's fair? Why didn't god make it fair from the start?
How is someone else being hurt (The innocent daughter) punishment for someone else? How is it fair that innocents have to be hurt as punishment to others?

Again, how is ignorance a sin?


If you can choose to be outside God's plan, then God has no control over things and omnipotence breaks down. Omniscience and Omnipotence require that every event in the Universe is part of God's plan. Therefore, God is responsible for every atrocity in history, not just the ones done in His name. Otherwise, God's power ends where Man's free will starts, and God is therefore not all-mighty... which goes against the basic tenets of Christianity; but the notion that there is no free will also goes against the basic tenets of Christianity. For God to be omnipotent, his will must be made manifest automatically. For God to be omniscient, he has to be aware of every event that happens in the universe. Isn't free will essentially equivalent to God making a rock so heavy, not him could lift it? He is deliberately limiting his omnipotence. But then why does he interfere? How is it fair of him to give man the right to decide between Heaven or Hell and then alternate wildly between smiting anyone who fails to choose "Heaven" (Most of the time because God never gave people the ability to make an informed decision) and letting people do whatever the hell they want without interfering. Particularly, what the hell happened that God no longer intervenes flashily like he used to? Why did God's direct intervention only happen during a very limited time period?

*BZZZZZT* Bad physics alert! BAD PHYSICS ALERT! The Universe has been conclusively proven to be nondeterministic! THE UNIVERSE HAS BEEN CONCLUSIVELY PROVEN TO BE NONDETERMINISTIC! This is NOT a test! I repeat, THIS IS NOT A TEST. If this were a test, you wouldn't be seeing Daganev being hit by a lightspeed cluebat right now.
I admit though that I would not enjoy being called a tool. One reason I don't enjoy belief systems trying to make me some sky-fairy's instrument.

Thinking in a vacuum is fun... brain embolism ftw.

This may have already been addressed. If so, I apologize. I was raised a Christian and actually taught Children's Church for a while. However, I basically fell away from the faith. I just started thinking more and more about things and no matter how hard I tried to supress doubts, I couldn't. I would very much like to believe again. My life was generally better then. But, I simply cannot. It's something I've struggled with for about two years now.

I have a couple questions.

1) God is supposed to be all-knowing. Which means he knows everything from the past to the present, to the future. He's numbered the hairs on our heads. He's made known the future. Now, if there is a God and if this God is who the Bible says he is, why would a loving God create individuals knowing that most of these will end up spending an eternity in Hell? Don't play the free will concept with me. Yes, I know there are concequences to our actions, etc etc. However, why even CREATE a person when you know this person will grow to be a nonbeliever, die, and be condemned to Hell?

2) The concept of free will. From my limited understanding, God wanted a people who would love him for...himself. Not because they had no choice. I can understand that. I wouldn't want my family to love me because they had to. Yet, when he gave us free will, he knew what would become of it. He knew about the masses that would end up condemned. He knew that a minority would actually make it into Paradise. He knew the first sin would take place. He knew the suffering that would come. Yet, that knowledge did not deter a "loving, compassionate God".


You say, his way of thinking is above our own. No one can claim to know the mind of God. Alright then. Even so, IF the Bible has a hint of truth in it, these things I've pointed out do not show a loving God. To me, they show a God who created mankind to toy with, and to throw away the "evil" ones. These evil people are here because HE made them... he knowingly created them.

So, in saying all this, who is the true evil? The one portrayed in scripture as the Roaring Lion, or the loving God?

Honestly, I'm not trying to deter anyone from their faith. I'm truly glad you can hold onto it. I wish I could do the same.

remember kids, Jesus saves, everyone else takes damage

1) He allowed evil spirits to possess people so he'll punish/test them via the spirit. Really now if God himself will show his true power, he'd just say DIE ALL OF YOU or think/wink/breathe and we're gone. His miracles, and other plans of his cannot be fathomed by the human mind you know as we'd just be having headaches.

2) He wanted people to praise and love him, and have his son Jesus have brothers and sisters. He created us in his very image, true and in fact we had a paradise to live in with everything we need. Now because of sin of Adam and Eve, then problems occur, we brought it upon ourselves, not God and seeing the people chose to disobey him, then he let us go.

Again, in God's plan, it's to be with him forever, so he send prophets, chosen people, miracles, signs and lastly, his only son who came to us as both man and God in a final attempt to save us. Now that it has been done, Jesus' followers will be the one to spread the good news and it is up to our free will if we'd listen or not...

God's perfect plan/will. His perfect will allows for those he created to be condemned. And yes, our sin is supposed to be what condemns us, not God himself. My argument is that God knowingly created us. Knowing what the future would hold. Now, weighing it, this is what I personally came up with.


God knew what would happen to most of his creation, yet he still followed through. He pretty much chose selfishness before compassion.

Why would you say such a thing, you ask? Simply put, he chose to entertain himself at the expense of...us.

All this is only valid if you believe what the Bible claims to be true. Personally, I'm not sure what I believe.


Editted to add: Faith, I've never understood what the big deal about faith is. If God's plan is for us to live for eternity with him, why must faith be such a huge thing? He doesn't want to become too involved. He wants us to make our own choices. Fine and dandy. But, why not make yourself known? He's certainly capable of it. Why leave generations wondering if there is actually a God, if the Bible is true, if there is indeed life after death, and what will that life actually entail? Yes, we're supposed to have been left an instruction manual.

Let me put this into a more modern perspective. I've recently viewed faith and the bible like this. It would be like me placing my children on a deserted island, handing them a book, then telling them to abide by the rules listed within. Then, leaving and telling them to live by faith that I do exist. I would pop in on occassion for a few shows, in the beginning. After a few generations, I would completely remove myself from them, sit back, and watch how they progressed. I'd watch how they would kill one another. I'd sit back and watch some die of starvation. I'd watch children needlessly tortured. I'd sit back and listen to people silently begging me to show myself, begging for my help, only to ignore them.


This is how I view God, if there is one.

Hmm, entertain? Hmm, I don't see it that way, probably for you but for me I don't.

Even as Christians, we still have different POVs so there's a lot of confusion about it.

And in truth, I lost my faith when I had a bad experience with 'priests' and some other christians who mistreated me a few years back, I just rely to the bible now whenever I need help in faithful matters.

For anyone debating that morality is ingrained, I'd have to say it's not. It is created by what is the social norm at them time. I do believe there is a sense of compassion that is ingrained in people for other people though.

I.E: slavery was considered a common practice and was not considered amoral because slaves were not considered people. It was not until some one said "Hey they are people" that compassion was felt and the idea that slavery was unjust came about.

Or in Rome where homosexuality, pedophilia, and prostitution was considered ok practices in that society. while in modern society Homosexuality has been an approved practice for only a short time now. Pedophilia and prostitution are still considered amoral.

I'm obviously not saying pedophile-ism is alright, just using it as an example

Are you saying that religious doctrine is our earliest form of written record? I've always learnt that economic records were the earliest kind.

writing

You're right

There's another line of inquiry I'd like to open here, because it's relatively novel.

Basically, the Bible is the inspired word of God, transcribed with reasonable faithfulness; let's define "reasonable faithfulness", for the sake of argument, as the same degree of faithfulness we find in modern translations of Homer's Odissey, or better.

However, the Bible is a horrible book. I don't mean that in the sense that it is violent (Though it is) but rather in the sense that it's a terrible read. Reading the whole Bible, point to point, is an exercise in mental anguish. The book is dull, repetitive and confusing; it is downright silly at times. It glosses over important or interesting parts, and spends whole chapters detailing recipes for burnt offerings (Multiple times) and obscure genealogies (Whole chapters of Bob begat Carl, who married Alice, who begat Dave). It is contradictory at points, and so confusing, an entire field of study exists to interpret it, and after nearly two thousand years of Christian interpretation and apologetics (And even more of Jewish interpretation) failed to produce an interpretation that is coherent with all parts of the work and universally acceptable.

What I ask is, why would a perfect, omnipotent being write a book that no modern-day publisher would touch? Furthermore, if the book was created to spread his word, why is it so difficult to understand and lends itself to multiple different interpretations? Why aren't God's intentions immediately obvious when reading the Bible? Additionally, why is the Bible only relevant to the people who lived in the Middle East during Biblical times? Why does it have to be stretched to apply to modern things (Like the passage about Onan being taken to mean God condemns birth control)?

The passage about Onan can reasonably be taken to refer to not simply the spilling of seed upon the ground, but the wastage of sperm in general. If there is a good chance that your sperm will fertilise your partner, then it is not a waste. If you have taken steps to ensure that pregnancy is more unlikely or simply will not happen... then sex stops procreational, it becomes masturbatory (i.e in that it has no worth beyond an instant, transient gratification), and as sperm is wasted, what you're doing is analagous with Onan's sin.

It can also be taken to mean that you're not supposed to spill your seed upon the ground (Catching it in a jar is fine); that birth control is bad but says nothing about masturbation; that coitus interruptus is bad, but other methods of contraception are not or are ambiguous; it could be taken to mean (In the translation I read) that Onan was spilling someone else's seed. But it's usually taken as a condemnation of masturbation and birth control (Err on the side of caution I guess). It could also be utterly figurative, or something that only applies to that case (Onan is the only one who gets smitten for spilling his seed; wouldn't be God's first temper tantrum). In fact, the Bible seems to give another note on masturbation with no mention of punishment:

What criteria is used to define what is literal and what is figurative? What is specific and what is general? And most importantly, why does a divinely inspired book need such interpretation at all?

This is particularly aimed at fundamentalists, who believe that the Bible is faithfully transcribed and wholly inspired - But why should God be unable to make a book that is comprehensible? Why would He want us to make mistakes about His word and consequently damn ourselves or sin inadvertently?

I think numerical inaccuracies in the bible blow the whole "perfect infallible" word of God thing out of the water.

Not really. God didn't write the bible, and people make mistakes.

The view espoused by fundamentalists is that God wrote the Bible, or that it was transcribed faithfully by people who were divinely inspired; that is what I'm arguing against.

Yes, and that's the point. People do make mistakes. The question becomes: What other mistakes are in it?

I may a tad off in this, but as for the truth and believing the bible, first off a lot of the things to be taken as lessons from the Bible can be subjective in that they can take very different meanings to different people and sometimes in ways that in todays world is considered morally wrong. Furthermore, and this is the part that I'm not 100% sure of facts, but clearly the bible has been first written by man over time, parts that could be included in the Bible have been removed or left out in the course of time by the Church, mostly that of the Roman Catholic Churches doing, for what largely amounts to what's usually reasons that pertain to making it fit to the cultural beliefs of their time. And then, the bible with it's many different versions has been translated, retranslated, rewritten then retranslated, 'beautified' and rewritten again ad nauseum throughout time. I think that leaves with one what is honestly a rather good read at times from a purely 'do you enjoy reading it' standpoint. But I feel some clear fundamentals imbued within that are perhaps the foundations of Christianities belief system, you really can't take a whole lot of it for face value, nor can you truly decipher the original meanings and teachings from parts of it in the current forms it holds today.


The old testament and new testament are suggested reading as much as many other religious documents for various other religions, but me, personally I can't look at the Bible and say that I trust it as a source to live my life by. I think the only true guidance that can be found in God, whatever your penultimate God may be is in direct, spiritual connection with them by various means, often achieved through worship or meditation. I've never had 'God' speak to me, but of what spiritual moments in life I have had, I do believe that I've felt in one way another the presence and guidance of a higher being in times of great need or just when I open myself fully to it in faith and belief.

I think perhaps the ultimate guidance found in most religious texts is in teaching one to open themself to their respective God in heart and mind and let them reach out and touch their life directly in someway, wether metaphorically or perhaps for some in a more tangible way. I don't think any truly religious person can say they truly know their God until they've done so and feel as if they've been graced by their presence in some way.


Religion itself though, and I'm referring to the insitutions that Religions have become is a rather big sham to me, personally. And really, eh, I don't know what I am to be labeled as religiously anymore. It's all very mutable to me now. The closest fitting label I know of is to be referred to as agnostic. I'm really not much of a religious debater, so I probably won't try to add more to this thread. I'm very much to each their own in this regard, let them voice their opinions and beliefs to be heard and that's it. Trying to prove one way or another is often futile and accomplishes little, especially in regards to these subjects.