Fuddam, A Few Moments Of Your Time Please.

[G4Z]

How about Fuddam explains where exactly in the bible it says that some bits are allegorical and some are to be taken at face value? Is it in the preface next the words 'all events and characters portrayed..'

If its not in the book, then somebody has either told him to look at it this way or he has decided himself. Either way its pretty presumptuous to do this with the word of the almighty sky clown.

On that topic I found this video interesting : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zSvY2Up2EA

[MadduckUK]

sounds interesting G4Z.. the bits i can understand does he have no better way of doing it than "mic close to phone"?

[G4Z]

This follow up one is quite good but long, the contradictions in this seemingly quite intelligent guys logic are glaring but at the same time he is dead right about all christians being pick and choose.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLZYMyAyFVc

[fuddam]

mediaboy: good questions. will answer them in due course. gotta hit the sack right now

[Koolpc]

When I speak to God on judgement day I will tell him this is the first time I have spoken to you.

What makes you think you will be there? Remember, God is reading what you have written!!

Then I will ask him to justify the millions of deaths caused by religion. The slaughter carried out in his name. The children abused by his Priests. Allowng his message to be the engine of more suffering than any other single event.

Religious wars have nothing to do with God. They are caused by man who cannot agree on anything!! Man will always fight over different things. Priests who abuse kids etc are not gods fault. They are twisted individuals who use the white collar to entice etc. This has nothing to do with god.

If he falls to his knees and begs forgiveness for not acting while all this evil was done in his name (I will make it clear there has been no evil commited in my name) I might forgive him and listen to his story.

God has nothing to be guilty about. Man makes his own bed to lie in. It is not god who makes it. Why should god act on these evils? It is up to man to see and seek forgiveness.

[mediaboy]

^ Didn't I already answer that post?

But yeah, koolpc makes fairly good points.

[iranu]

And God is perfectly just, and absolutely loving. As I said in previous post, He judges each according to what they know. Your questions above imply an unjust sentencing to hell.

It's well worth appreciating that hell was NEVER intended for humankind. It was the place the satan and his legions were cast, out of heaven.
"I did not prepare this place for men, but all those who do not believe in me as their Savior and those who do not live according to my word will go there (Revelation 20:14)"

Those two sentences are mutually exclusive unless the definitions of loving and hell are not the usual ones. An absolutely loving person would forgive someone who did not believe and live accordingly not cast them into an eternity of suffering.

[fuddam]

Those two sentences are mutually exclusive unless the definitions of loving and hell are not the usual ones. An absolutely loving person would forgive someone who did not believe and live accordingly not cast them into an eternity of suffering.

If you look at the quote again, you will see I said "perfectly just and absolutely loving".

Where would the justice be, if anyone could do anything, and still end up in heaven? I am sure you want justice to be upheld.

So, God provides the forgiveness (Christ died for *all* humankind - John 3:16) ***but*** the unjust have to sincerely repent, and ask for that forgiveness.
In so doing, they are cleansed, and thus made righteous and acceptable to God, to be in His presence.

[mediaboy]

Then surely "Perfectly Loved and Absolutely loving" are also mutually exclusive?

[fuddam]

How about Fuddam explains where exactly in the bible it says that some bits are allegorical and some are to be taken at face value? Is it in the preface next the words 'all events and characters portrayed..'

If its not in the book, then somebody has either told him to look at it this way or he has decided himself. Either way its pretty presumptuous to do this with the word of the almighty sky clown.

A good question. It might appear that we could drown in that thar subjectivity, however, let us consider the following:

we don't read the Bible purely literally or purely figuratively, but search for the intended MEANING.

to quote http://www.wcg.org/lit/bible/literal2.htm

eg: When Jesus gave 5,000 people bread and fish (John 6:1-15), for example, he gave them real bread to satisfy their physical need. Here we are reading literally. But just a few verses later, we are told that Jesus is "the bread of life" (verse 35). Here we must read figuratively: Jesus is the source and sustainer of eternal life.

In everyday speech, we often use figurative language. We might say, "He was green with envy," or "She really got my goat." By using such figures of speech, we can communicate better than if we had to use words literally.

In the Bible, if we always prefer a literal meaning, we may miss the point. The disciples made this mistake when Jesus told them to beware of the "yeast" of the Jewish leaders (Matthew 16:6). The disciples thought about their failure to bring any bread.

Jesus Christ reminded them that he could create bread for thousands if necessary. He wasn't worried about physical bread. The disciples then understood that Jesus meant doctrine or teaching when he had said "yeast" (verse 12). It was a figure of speech.

Jesus explained his ministry in figurative language rather than in plain words (John 16:25). His parables, for example, often puzzled people. Even his disciples had to ask him to explain what he meant (Mark 4:10, 13). Many of his teachings are still the subject of debate.

"If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out," Jesus taught in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:29). But can an eye really cause us to sin? No. Jesus was making a bold statement to emphasize an important principle.

Do we believe the Bible? Certainly! We believe what it means, the spirit or the principle of what it says, not merely what the words mean literally. We believe that Jesus gave people literal bread, and that he is the bread of life. We can believe a figurative statement just as well as a literal one.

Another example might be from Genesis. The proverbial question over the 6 days of Creation. Real or metaphor?

For me, it doesn't matter, because there is a much bigger question: Is there a God, and if there is, did He make creation? And as a God who can make the entire universe, could he make the world in 6 literal days? Surely. Did he do so? Unlikely, in the face of physical evidence /dinosaurs etc.

So, if he made it over millenia, would you prefer Genesis to read in the following way?:

For the first 3461 trillion years, God brought the universe into being. Then He spent 234 million years making earth. Then he spent another 123 million years making the first life forms, after which it took another 111.45 million years to bring animal life forms into being. Blah blah blah.

Is that how you want the Bible to read? For me, no, because it matters not how many earth days it took. FAR more important is the theology behind it, and far richer.

Here are some other lit vs fig explanations I quickly googled:

http://renaissanceguy.wordpress.com/...vs-figurative/
http://www.watchmanmag.com/0204/020414.htm

[fuddam]

Then surely "Perfectly Loved and Absolutely loving" are also mutually exclusive?

i didn't say that.

[fuddam]

Reference|Question

Gen 1|1 God creates the universe. So was God there before the universe, or was he created at the same time as it? Who created God?

Biblical answer: there is no 'before' for God. It's not something that sits well with our foundationalist tendencies, but my best explanation would probably be that God sits OUTSIDE of time. As such, there is no beginning and end.

Gen 2|8 Where's Eden now?

does not exist any more

Gen 3|1 If the snake was created by God, and animals have no freewill (as shown in the early chapters of Genesis - only humans were given freewill), does this mean that the snake was chosen and impelled by God to tempt humans in to sinning, thereby making God responsible for sin?

God allowed sin to happen, eg he did not stop Lucifer from becoming egotistical, but that does not make God the author of sin. There are numerous verses on how God hates sin. At the same time, He had to give humankind a choice, in order for free will to have any meaning.

A complex issue, so look here for an alternative viewpoint (amongst many): http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/evil.html

A very good article on the problem of an omnipotent omnibenevolent God and the existence of evil can be found here: http://www.bethinking.org/suffering/...em-of-evil.htm

also, from http://www.bethinking.org/suffering/...l-to-exist.htm

some people are still bothered that God even allows evil in the first place. They question His wisdom in giving man a choice in the matter. Dorothy Sayers put the problem of evil in the proper perspective: “For whatever reason God chose to make man as he is — limited and suffering and subject to sorrows and death — He had the honesty and the courage to take His own medicine. Whatever game he is playing with His creation, He has kept his own rules and played fair. He can exact nothing from man that He has not exacted from Himself. He has Himself gone through the whole of human experience, from the trivial irritations of family life and the cramping restrictions of hard work and lack of money to the worst horrors of pain and humiliation, defeat, despair and death. When He was a man, He played the man. He was born in poverty and died in disgrace and thought it well worthwhile” (Dorothy Sayers, Creed or Chaos? New York, Harcourt Brace, 1949, p. 4).

Gen 2|17 God lies to his people. In Exo 20, God instructs them not to lie. Does this not make God a sinner, and therefore not worthy of living in heaven?

2:17 "but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will surely die.”

How is that a lie? He did not say WHEN they would die (ie instant or later) so there is no contradiction. By eating of the apple (turning from God), they brought death into the world

Gen 3|11-13 If God is allpresent and allknowing then why does he not know why the women ate the apple and compelled Adam into doing so?

Of course He knows, but He was doing what any parent does: giving the culprits a chance to own up for their sins, to look into themselves. And what do we find? They blame others for their faults - as people do today.

Gen 3|16-19 Is what God does to Adam and Eve comparable to what they did? Doesn't this mean that God is not better than humans and is, once again, breaking commandments that he sets down later in Lev and Exo?

No. God (like a parent) gave his children a perfect, safe, loving environment. They decided to reject that (in their disobedience). They suffered the consequences, which were warned of BEFORE their sin.

Gen 3|21 Why does God now help Adam and Eve after he has punished them?

He still loves them, like a parent loves his disobedient children. He still wants them to see the error of their ways, to repent, and be restored in relationship to Him.

Gen 3|22 Is the mention of "one of us" implying the existance of the Trinity this early in the bible? And also, as we are like them, and look like them and act like them does this not mean that we are, in the end, Gods?

yes, reference to the Trinity.

Made in His image does not mean we are equal to Him. I can make a robot in my image, yet it does not equate to me in power, rights, status, morality, etc. God is the Creator, we are the Creation.

Gen 4|9 God once again asks someone something. Isn't this a weakening of their faith in him, as he is showing that he is not allpresent and allknowing? Why does God do this?

see above. Giving the guilty a chance to own up.

replies to your remaining questions later

[iranu]

If you look at the quote again, you will see I said "perfectly just and absolutely loving".

Where would the justice be, if anyone could do anything, and still end up in heaven? I am sure you want justice to be upheld.

No, you said

but all those who do not believe in me as their Savior...

So someone could live their life according to the rules without knowing the rules, but not believe and still wind up in hell.

As for justice, then no, I certainly wouldn't want the god as portrayed in the bible to make judgements on people for justice because I don't consider that justice to be fair having read what has been metered out in the past. Also I can't see how you can be absolutely loving whilst condemning someone to an eternity in hell.

[G4Z]

we don't read the Bible purely literally or purely figuratively, but search for the intended MEANING.

You miss my question here I think, I am asking you where in the bible it says you should interpret it, look for meaning or whatever. I don't think it does, therefore its something you decided for yourself. Either the book is infallible and perfect and you should take it literally or it isn't in which case you might interpret it. Are you saying that this book is not divine and perfect because you have to interpret it?

Also, who's interpretation or translation do you go by, as I understand it there are several versions of the bible and in the past there have been many more.

I don't want to get into it with you about creation of the universe because its not the point of the thread (and I reckon you already lost that argument in previous threads although obviously I doubt you see it that way).

[mediaboy]

Fuddam:

Gen 1|26 Then God said, "And now we will make human beings; they will be like us and resemble us"

So God looks like a human

Gen 3|22 Then the LORD God said, "Now the man has become like one of us and has knowledge of what is good and what is bad."

So we have God's Knowledge - or at least, the part that seperated him from man and human, as the snake says (Gen 3|4-5) "That's not true; you will not die. God said that because he knows that when you eat it you will be like Gods and know what is good and what is bad." Admittedly, some versions of the bible replace the second Gods with "God" but the Hebrew is debateable. Other versions have "Know everything" as well, but once again, this is due to translation.

So if we will "be like Gods" (as - afterall - the snake told the truth about us not dying when we ate the fruit, and the snake told the truth about us knowing what is good and bad it can be presumed that the snake knows what it is talking about) and we then ate the fruit are we not then Gods?

[G4Z]

Or maybe... the whole thing is just made up and didn't happen at all!

Which clearly makes far more sense.