Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 51 (9179 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,191 Year: 5,448/9,624 Month: 473/323 Week: 113/204 Day: 13/16 Hour: 2/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Religion or Science - How do they compare?
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1556 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 151 of 882 (832851)
05-12-2018 10:51 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by GDR
05-12-2018 6:27 PM


Re: Moral problems in the Bible?
Yes I do worship a God who prescribed public stoning back when that was the usual way of executing the death penalty for transgressions of the law. No "child" was stoned, however, I'm sure you are talking about the disobedient son, but he was an adult. And "genocide" is not the right word for God's judgment against a whole people for their accumulated transgressions of the law. As I said, God's justice is harsh, and none of us is comfortable with it, but it IS justice and not murder. People who think they are more righteous than God are a sad lot.
hen why are there so many contradictions in morality, history, timing etc.
The very few contradictions are trivial and probably reconcilable.
Yes God inspired people to write their stories and if read correctly He will speak knowledge and wisdom to us through this library of 66 books. Read literally as you do then God is god of situational ethics and hypocrisy, telling us that killing is wrong but then having Him either directly slaughtering communities, or even worse, ordering His followers to commit genocide. That is what you get when you make a false idol out of the Bible, and follow it even when it directly opposes the life and message of Jesus.
I have never ever said I read the Bible "literally." The word "inspire" means "God breathed" which is a clear statement of God's authorship.
God says killing the INNOCENT is wrong, but the death penalty is justice. And that means in some cases judgment against a whole community. And none of this opposes Jesus. You have a phony Jesus. Jesus quoted Isaiah 61 in the synagogue to announce His Messiahship, all about how He came to comfort and save, but He specifically left off the last line which says one of the roles of the Messiah is "vengeance." He left it off because that isn't why He came the first time but it will be His task when He comes the second time.
God specifically said that a person who takes the life of another person is to lose his own life:
Gen 9:6 writes:
Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.
If it bothers you that we stay home while the state does the deed out of our sight, we could always bring back public stoning. I think the main idea of that was that the whole community be involved in the act of justice. The "unclean" thing would be refusing to put to death someone who really deserves it.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by GDR, posted 05-12-2018 6:27 PM GDR has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by Tangle, posted 05-13-2018 1:49 AM Faith has replied
 Message 154 by PaulK, posted 05-13-2018 4:15 AM Faith has replied
 Message 231 by Aussie, posted 05-16-2018 11:55 AM Faith has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9538
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.1


(1)
Message 152 of 882 (832853)
05-13-2018 1:49 AM
Reply to: Message 151 by Faith
05-12-2018 10:51 PM


Re: Moral problems in the Bible?
Faith writes:
If it bothers you that we stay home while the state does the deed out of our sight, we could always bring back public stoning.
Quite possibly the most disgusting thing ever written on these boards. There is nothing Christian about you Faith.
Despite the request for those that are without sin to cast the first stone, you'd be first in line wouldn't you?

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Faith, posted 05-12-2018 10:51 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by Faith, posted 05-13-2018 4:57 AM Tangle has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6206
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005


Message 153 of 882 (832854)
05-13-2018 2:23 AM
Reply to: Message 147 by PaulK
05-12-2018 5:44 PM


Re: Moral problems in the Bible?
PaulK writes:
The idea that this refers to the Bible as a whole - as the author would have you believe - is simply not present in the text. There is nothing there to say which work is meant to be the word of our God.
The Bible talks about the word of God in many places, but to say that the Bible is talking about itself when no such claim is present is simply dishonest.
So a question. If the author truly believed that the Bible was the word of God, why would he misrepresent it so obviously ? And if he doesn’t believe it, why should anyone believe him ?
When the Biblical writers use the term "Word of God" it is not referring to the Scriptures. It is referring to the Logos and can be also translated as the "wisdom" of God. In Genesis it metaphorically talks about God speaking the world into existence, (such as in God said let there be light etc. ) and so it is in reference to that. The "Word of God" put another way is the essence, the wisdom and the power of God when used in the Bible.
It is also used by the writer of the Gospel of John when he sates that the "Word became flesh" in the person of Jesus. That is why as Christian we understand the true nature of God by looking at Jesus and not at an inerrant Bible.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by PaulK, posted 05-12-2018 5:44 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by PaulK, posted 05-13-2018 4:17 AM GDR has replied
 Message 157 by Faith, posted 05-13-2018 5:06 AM GDR has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17853
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 154 of 882 (832855)
05-13-2018 4:15 AM
Reply to: Message 151 by Faith
05-12-2018 10:51 PM


Re: Moral problems in the Bible?
quote:
The very few contradictions are trivial and probably reconcilable.
I can think of one that poses some pretty serious problems. And the disagreements over the post-resurrection appearances are pretty damning to the idea of the Gospels as reliable history.
quote:
I have never ever said I read the Bible "literally." The word "inspire" means "God breathed" which is a clear statement of God's authorship.
No, it isn’t. Aside from noting that that statement doesn’t even clearly apply to the book it is found in, we can point out that when the Bible does attribute authorship it is always to a human author.
Why then should we read breathed as referring to authorship rather than to a more common meaning of inspired as the word is normally used ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Faith, posted 05-12-2018 10:51 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 158 by Faith, posted 05-13-2018 5:15 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17853
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 155 of 882 (832856)
05-13-2018 4:17 AM
Reply to: Message 153 by GDR
05-13-2018 2:23 AM


Re: Moral problems in the Bible?
quote:
When the Biblical writers use the term "Word of God" it is not referring to the Scriptures. It is referring to the Logos and can be also translated as the "wisdom" of God. In Genesis it metaphorically talks about God speaking the world into existence, (such as in God said let there be light etc. ) and so it is in reference to that. The "Word of God" put another way is the essence, the wisdom and the power of God when used in the Bible.
Or it might refer to the words attributed to God in the Bible. While the Bible never claims divine authorship it does have sections that are claim to be God’s words, as set down by the human writers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by GDR, posted 05-13-2018 2:23 AM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by GDR, posted 05-13-2018 9:25 AM PaulK has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1556 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 156 of 882 (832857)
05-13-2018 4:57 AM
Reply to: Message 152 by Tangle
05-13-2018 1:49 AM


Re: Moral problems in the Bible?
I won't even defend myself. I knew the humorless lefties here would have to have some kind of fit of accusatory indignation. It's all they know how to do. Hey, put it in your signature so the whole leftie crew can get their daily rush of twisted moral indignation.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Tangle, posted 05-13-2018 1:49 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 165 by Tangle, posted 05-13-2018 8:15 AM Faith has replied
 Message 233 by Aussie, posted 05-16-2018 12:08 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1556 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 157 of 882 (832858)
05-13-2018 5:06 AM
Reply to: Message 153 by GDR
05-13-2018 2:23 AM


Re: Moral problems in the Bible?
When the Biblical writers use the term "Word of God" it is not referring to the Scriptures. It is referring to the Logos and can be also translated as the "wisdom" of God. In Genesis it metaphorically talks about God speaking the world into existence, (such as in God said let there be light etc. ) and so it is in reference to that. The "Word of God" put another way is the essence, the wisdom and the power of God when used in the Bible.
Traditional Bible theologians say you're wrong. They agree with that quote I gave that "All scripture is God-breathed." I think I'll go with them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by GDR, posted 05-13-2018 2:23 AM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by GDR, posted 05-13-2018 9:53 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1556 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 158 of 882 (832859)
05-13-2018 5:15 AM
Reply to: Message 154 by PaulK
05-13-2018 4:15 AM


Theopneustos
Why then should we read breathed as referring to authorship rather than to a more common meaning of inspired as the word is normally used ?
Because "God-brfeathed" is what it means in the original Greek.
theopneustos: God-breathed, i.e. inspired by God
Original Word: ,
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: theopneustos
Phonetic Spelling: (theh-op'-nyoo-stos)
Short Definition: God-breathed, inspired by God
Definition: God-breathed, inspired by God, due to the inspiration of God.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by PaulK, posted 05-13-2018 4:15 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by PaulK, posted 05-13-2018 5:29 AM Faith has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17853
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 159 of 882 (832860)
05-13-2018 5:29 AM
Reply to: Message 158 by Faith
05-13-2018 5:15 AM


Re: Moral problems in the Bible?
quote:
Because "God-brfeathed" is what it means in the original Greek.
theopneustos: God-breathed, i.e. inspired by God
Original Word: ,
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: theopneustos
Phonetic Spelling: (theh-op'-nyoo-stos)
Short Definition: God-breathed, inspired by God
Definition: God-breathed, inspired by God, due to the inspiration of God.

In other words it doesn’t mean inspired by God in the more usual sense - because it is explicitly listed as a possible meaning.
Didn’t you even read the material you quoted ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by Faith, posted 05-13-2018 5:15 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by Faith, posted 05-13-2018 5:31 AM PaulK has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1556 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 160 of 882 (832861)
05-13-2018 5:31 AM
Reply to: Message 159 by PaulK
05-13-2018 5:29 AM


Re: Moral problems in the Bible?
Of course. It is the meaning understood by all traditional Bible exegetes. But since you are among those so far above the traditionalists of course you must be right. You can argue it with God when the time comes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by PaulK, posted 05-13-2018 5:29 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 161 by PaulK, posted 05-13-2018 5:57 AM Faith has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17853
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 161 of 882 (832862)
05-13-2018 5:57 AM
Reply to: Message 160 by Faith
05-13-2018 5:31 AM


Re: Moral problems in the Bible?
quote:
Of course. It is the meaning understood by all traditional Bible exegetes.
Where traditional means those who want to claim that the Bible was written by God. Since their view is clearly not supported by the Bible it is not surprising that they would resort to taking a strained reading of the one verse that comes closest.
quote:
But since you are among those so far above the traditionalists of course you must be right.
You mean since I dare to read the Bible for myself instead of worshipping your idols.
quote:
You can argue it with God when the time comes.
Because God has to worship your idols, too ? I hardly think so.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by Faith, posted 05-13-2018 5:31 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by Faith, posted 05-13-2018 6:01 AM PaulK has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1556 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 162 of 882 (832863)
05-13-2018 6:01 AM
Reply to: Message 161 by PaulK
05-13-2018 5:57 AM


Re: Moral problems in the Bible?
Traditional means the line through the Reformation to the present. Standard garden-variety evangelicals. But we know they don't count because PaulK is the expert on all of it and he disagrees with them.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by PaulK, posted 05-13-2018 5:57 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by PaulK, posted 05-13-2018 6:20 AM Faith has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17853
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 163 of 882 (832864)
05-13-2018 6:20 AM
Reply to: Message 162 by Faith
05-13-2018 6:01 AM


Re: Moral problems in the Bible?
quote:
Traditional means the line through the Reformation to the present.
So more than a thousand years after the book was written. If your claim is even true. Please support it - if you can.
quote:
But we know they don't count because PaulK is the expert on all of it and he disagrees with them.
Your quotes list of meanings agrees with me. A plain reading of 2 Timothy agrees with me. The fact that both Bible and tradition attribute authorship to human writers agrees with me. The fact that the Bible contains sections where the authors claim to be repeating God’s words agrees with me.
In short, my position is Biblical, and yours is not. But I guess your few hundred years of tradition outweighs the Bible, and God just has to accept that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by Faith, posted 05-13-2018 6:01 AM Faith has not replied

  
mike the wiz
Member (Idle past 106 days)
Posts: 4755
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


(1)
Message 164 of 882 (832865)
05-13-2018 6:38 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
04-18-2018 8:21 AM


RAZD writes:
RELIGION:
All your questions answered ...
... trust us ...
SCIENCE:
All your answers questioned ...
... trust nothing ...
Religion is about authority and depends on people (preachers etc), while science is about process independent of people, and you don’t need to be an accredited scientist to do science.
I would say how you have FRAMED the question counts as rhetorical persuasion, though I like your smart little play on words. I don't say you're totally wrong on this.
If you see the two as mutually exclusive things for example, that seems loaded. Or are you just saying, "these are the differences."
The problem is with, "religion", the units of, "religion" would say, "trust us" about different things. For example one unit might ask me to trust that if there is thunder and lightning that the cause is Thor. It's misleading to present me because I am a Christian, as being on the side of that belief because such a belief is, "religious" when in actual fact I would accept the scientific explanation. I hope you can see my point.
The problem with, "religion" is that as a term it is something which is VASTLY MORE BROAD than the term, "science". If you are religious you can be an atheist pantheist that believes crystals can heal. Arguably you can believe in jedis and the force and be regarded as religious.
RAZD writes:
Religion is about authority and depends on people (preachers etc), while science is about process independent of people,
This is the problem, because it's a generalisation you use here. For example my faith in Christ doesn't depend on, "people", I don't know any religious people or preachers, nor depend on them. It's important to avoid a sweeping generalisation by saying the general rule will apply to the specific example.
That's what non-religious people tend to want to do, to give the common and broad and shared elements but dismiss any individual elements. Kind of like saying, "atheists are smarter than theists on average, therefore mike, this will mean your IQ is low".
For example, if there are 500 sweets all with similar sweet wrappers and you see many are opened and appear to be chocolate, it can be easy to jump to the conclusion there is chocolate in all of them. But if even one contains gold and the only way to know it is to personally unwrap it then the generalisation won't pertain to that individual example. Sure, they all have similarities, they seem to be the same shape, they seem to have the same decorations.
Yes, religion generally speaking consists of similar things, but they wildly differ, individually and on that level I don't believe you are making an evaluation, you are just lumping it as, "all the same" because of what they share. But what about what they don't share? For example, logically speaking if one is true and all the others are not, this gives one a much greater value than comparing it to the false ones and after all it is logically possible to answer all questions and the answers to turn out as true. If you were arrested for murder and were innocent, I am sure you wouldn't want me to say this if you could answer all of my interrogative questions; "that's what every guilty person here says, send him to prison."
RAZD writes:
All your answers questioned
I would say it's the same problem again - to generalise. I don't think this is the case for some theories I think in some ways, certain theories which science's survival now DEPENDS ON, are treated almost religiously. That is to say, where there is "one shot for science", it makes sense that scientists will hold on to that one possible scientific answer and not let go. That is what evolution-theory is like from my perspective. If evolution is false there is no other scientific answer if some for of evolution is false, so they basically treat evolution as a special case. If some type of evolution is wrong then the whole basis for answering all questions based on a scientific method, will unravel and the public will start to question just what it is science can answer, and will see science for what it should be and what it classically was - a limited tool, not an all-out replacement for meaning of life and faith.
But generally speaking you may be correct. But don't forget, as a Christian creationist, I only believe in 0.00001% of religion whereas for you it is 0%. Can you then see how it is a bit annoying to then be associated with the other 99.99 odd percent? I would also likely accept maybe 97% of what science says where as you would accept 100%. Can you see now if we look at those figures, how we compare as individuals ACTUALLY compares, rather than rhetorical persuasion? (That's if it was your motive to say, "I am scientific you are religious." If it wasn't then it's still important for me to set the record straight so that readers don't fall into the trap of that false dichotomy.)
Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 04-18-2018 8:21 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9538
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.1


(1)
Message 165 of 882 (832867)
05-13-2018 8:15 AM
Reply to: Message 156 by Faith
05-13-2018 4:57 AM


Re: Moral problems in the Bible?
Faith writes:
I won't even defend myself
The word you're looking for is 'can't,
I knew the humorless lefties here would have to have some kind of fit of accusatory indignation.
Right so you do want to defend yourself - are you now claiming humour? I've read what you wrote again, I'm still not seeing the funny side of public stonings.
Hey, put it in your signature so the whole leftie crew can get their daily rush of twisted moral indignation.
You said it Faith. I think you meant it and I note you're not denying it. It ain't Christian is it? Or maybe it is.
No it's not, what it is is fundamentalist. The same fanaticism as all those people you hate. Which, let's be frank, is pretty much everyone isn't it?

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by Faith, posted 05-13-2018 4:57 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 167 by Faith, posted 05-13-2018 9:09 AM Tangle has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024