Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Nobody Dies for a Lie

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
    None whatsoever. From the strict monotheist view that I share with Jews and Muslims I have lots of company in the simplicity and wonder of God.
    That should have been directed at Tassman.
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post


      Don't you have anything better to do?
      In your case ah . . . no.

      Intelligent meaningful posts give something better to do.
      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

      go with the flow the river knows . . .

      Frank

      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
        That should have been directed at Tassman.
        I have my own disagreements with Tassman, and he does not ridicule me as many do.

        My disagreements concerning the Trinity are those that cling to a Roman theology.
        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

        go with the flow the river knows . . .

        Frank

        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
          None whatsoever. From the strict monotheist view that I share with Jews and Muslims I have lots of company in the simplicity and wonder of God.
          Jews do claim a strict Monotheist view...but they obviously do not know their own Scriptures. Their are multiple places in the Old Testament Hebrew where the name used for God is plural. Virtually all Hebrew Scholars acknowledge that the word used many times for God in the Hebrew Scriptures, Elohim, is a plural noun. Genesis 1:26 for instance, "...let US make man in OUR own image..." Genesis 20:13: “And it came to pass, when God (Elohim) caused me to wander [literally: They caused me to wander] from my father’s house…" Genesis 35:7: “…because there God (Elohim) appeared unto him…” [Literally: They appeared unto him.] 2 Samuel 7:23: “…God (Elohim) went…” [Literally: They went.]

          Of course they appeal to the Shema of Deut. 6:4. So, to begin with, the words "Our God" in the text is again, plural and literally mean "our Gods"...but putting that aside, we have the translation of the Hebrew word "echad". But, if you look through the Old Testament, you see that the word "echad" doesn't mean a singular or absolute "one", but a compound "one". Look at Gen 1:5 The combination of evening and morning make up "one" day. Gen 2:24, a man and a woman together in marriage ...and the two shall be one (echad). In Ezra 2:64 we are told the whole assembly was as one again, (echad). So, as we can see, the use of the word echad in Scripture doesn't mean a single unit one, but a compound unit one. There is a word in Hebrew for a single unit of one, it's "yachid". So, If Moses wanted to teach Israels God was an absolute one instead of a compound one, "yachid" would have been a far more appropriate word. In fact, Maimonides noted the strength of “yachid” and chose to use that word in his “Thirteen Articles of Faith” in place of echad. However, Deuteronomy 6:4 (the Shema) does not use “yachid” in reference to God.

          And, there are places in the Hebrew Scripture that explicitly name either 2 or 3 different persons that are all referred to as "God". One example is Psalm 45:7-8:

          “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
          A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
          You love righteousness and hate wickedness;
          Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
          With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”

          Notice that the first Elohim is being addressed and the second Elohim is the God of the first Elohim. And so God’s God has anointed Him with the oil of gladness.

          Another example is Hosea 1:6 - 7
          6 She conceived again and bore a daughter. And the Lord said to him, “Call her name No Mercy, for I will no more have mercy on the house of Israel, to forgive them at all. 7 But I will have mercy on the house of Judah, and I will save them by the Lord their God. I will not save them by bow or by sword or by war or by horses or by horsemen.”



          The speaker is Elohim (See verse 6)who says He will have mercy on the house of Judah and will save them by YHVH, their Elohim. So Elohim number one will save Israel by means of Elohim number two.


          Not only is Elohim applied to two personalities in the same verse, but so is the very name of God.

          Another example is Genesis 19:24 which reads:


          “Then the LORD rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, from the LORD out of the heavens.”

          Clearly we have YHVH number one raining fire and brimstone from a second YHVH who is in heaven, the first one being on earth.

          And finally, we have examples of 3 personalities in one passage of Old Testament Scripture Isaiah 48:12 - 16: (pay attention to the last sentence that I bolded)
          12 “Listen to me, O Jacob,
          and Israel, whom I called!
          I am he; I am the first,
          and I am the last.
          13 My hand laid the foundation of the earth,
          and my right hand spread out the heavens;
          when I call to them,
          they stand forth together.


          14 “Assemble, all of you, and listen!
          Who among them has declared these things?
          The Lord loves him;
          he shall perform his purpose on Babylon,
          and his arm shall be against the Chaldeans.
          15 I, even I, have spoken and called him;
          I have brought him, and he will prosper in his way.
          16 Draw near to me, hear this:
          from the beginning I have not spoken in secret,
          from the time it came to be I have been there.”
          And now the Lord God has sent me, and his Spirit.

          So, as we can clearly see, the speaker refers to himself as the one who is responsible for the creation of the heavens and the earth...and it is abundantly clear that he cannot be speaking of anyone other than God. But then in verse 16, the speaker refers to himself using the pronouns of I and me and then distinguishes himself from two other personalities. He distinguishes himself from the Lord YHVH and then from the Spirit of God. Here is the Tri-unity as clearly defined as the Hebrew Scriptures make it.

          There is another passage in Isaiah 63:7 - 14 that also names the Trinity, but it's not as overt...
          Last edited by Littlejoe; 05-22-2018, 12:15 AM.
          "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

          "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

          Comment


          • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
            I have my own disagreements with Tassman, and he does not ridicule me as many do.

            My disagreements concerning the Trinity are those that cling to a Roman theology.
            My "that should have been directed at Tassman" was MY "that", not your "that".
            "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

            Comment


            • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
              I think we all know that. We just disagree on what is true or false. Our belief doesn't make it true or false. Our belief reflects what we find to be true or false.
              How do you find it true that there is no God?
              . . . the Gospel of Christ, for it is [the] power of God to salvation to every [one] believing, . . . -- Romans 1:16.

              . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4.

              Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                In your case ah . . . no.

                Intelligent meaningful posts give something better to do.
                We've never seen you give an "Intelligent meaningful post", so you have no room to talk.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Doug Shaver View Post
                  What about because you, 37818, say it is true?
                  My mere saying anything to be true does not make it true.
                  . . . the Gospel of Christ, for it is [the] power of God to salvation to every [one] believing, . . . -- Romans 1:16.

                  . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4.

                  Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by 37818 View Post
                    How do you find it true that there is no God?
                    First, there is no "proof" for god existing or not existing. Those beliefs will be based on where the preponderance of the evidence takes us. For me, the preponderance of the evidence points to "god" being a human creation. There are a lot of data points to that. One is the pattern of human history. One is the divergence of religious beliefs. One is the absence of any experience of such a being on my part. Another is the lack of any credible evidence to the existence of the supernatural from anywhere. Finally, there are the internal inconsistencies in most religions.

                    When I put that all together, I end up believing that humanity has created its gods, primarily in its own image and likeness. I believe the gods of our world exist in our beliefs, and not in objective reality.
                    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
                      Jews do claim a strict Monotheist view...but they obviously do not know their own Scriptures. Their are multiple places in the Old Testament Hebrew where the name used for God is plural. Virtually all Hebrew Scholars acknowledge that the word used many times for God in the Hebrew Scriptures, Elohim, is a plural noun. Genesis 1:26 for instance, "...let US make man in OUR own image..." Genesis 20:13: “And it came to pass, when God (Elohim) caused me to wander [literally: They caused me to wander] from my father’s house…" Genesis 35:7: “…because there God (Elohim) appeared unto him…” [Literally: They appeared unto him.] 2 Samuel 7:23: “…God (Elohim) went…” [Literally: They went.]

                      Of course they appeal to the Shema of Deut. 6:4. So, to begin with, the words "Our God" in the text is again, plural and literally mean "our Gods"...but putting that aside, we have the translation of the Hebrew word "echad". But, if you look through the Old Testament, you see that the word "echad" doesn't mean a singular or absolute "one", but a compound "one". Look at Gen 1:5 The combination of evening and morning make up "one" day. Gen 2:24, a man and a woman together in marriage ...and the two shall be one (echad). In Ezra 2:64 we are told the whole assembly was as one again, (echad). So, as we can see, the use of the word echad in Scripture doesn't mean a single unit one, but a compound unit one. There is a word in Hebrew for a single unit of one, it's "yachid". So, If Moses wanted to teach Israels God was an absolute one instead of a compound one, "yachid" would have been a far more appropriate word. In fact, Maimonides noted the strength of “yachid” and chose to use that word in his “Thirteen Articles of Faith” in place of echad. However, Deuteronomy 6:4 (the Shema) does not use “yachid” in reference to God.

                      And, there are places in the Hebrew Scripture that explicitly name either 2 or 3 different persons that are all referred to as "God". One example is Psalm 45:7-8:

                      “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
                      A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
                      You love righteousness and hate wickedness;
                      Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
                      With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”

                      Notice that the first Elohim is being addressed and the second Elohim is the God of the first Elohim. And so God’s God has anointed Him with the oil of gladness.

                      Another example is Hosea 1:6 - 7
                      6 She conceived again and bore a daughter. And the Lord said to him, “Call her name No Mercy, for I will no more have mercy on the house of Israel, to forgive them at all. 7 But I will have mercy on the house of Judah, and I will save them by the Lord their God. I will not save them by bow or by sword or by war or by horses or by horsemen.”



                      The speaker is Elohim (See verse 6)who says He will have mercy on the house of Judah and will save them by YHVH, their Elohim. So Elohim number one will save Israel by means of Elohim number two.


                      Not only is Elohim applied to two personalities in the same verse, but so is the very name of God.

                      Another example is Genesis 19:24 which reads:


                      “Then the LORD rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, from the LORD out of the heavens.”

                      Clearly we have YHVH number one raining fire and brimstone from a second YHVH who is in heaven, the first one being on earth.

                      And finally, we have examples of 3 personalities in one passage of Old Testament Scripture Isaiah 48:12 - 16: (pay attention to the last sentence that I bolded)
                      12 “Listen to me, O Jacob,
                      and Israel, whom I called!
                      I am he; I am the first,
                      and I am the last.
                      13 My hand laid the foundation of the earth,
                      and my right hand spread out the heavens;
                      when I call to them,
                      they stand forth together.


                      14 “Assemble, all of you, and listen!
                      Who among them has declared these things?
                      The Lord loves him;
                      he shall perform his purpose on Babylon,
                      and his arm shall be against the Chaldeans.
                      15 I, even I, have spoken and called him;
                      I have brought him, and he will prosper in his way.
                      16 Draw near to me, hear this:
                      from the beginning I have not spoken in secret,
                      from the time it came to be I have been there.”
                      And now the Lord God has sent me, and his Spirit.

                      So, as we can clearly see, the speaker refers to himself as the one who is responsible for the creation of the heavens and the earth...and it is abundantly clear that he cannot be speaking of anyone other than God. But then in verse 16, the speaker refers to himself using the pronouns of I and me and then distinguishes himself from two other personalities. He distinguishes himself from the Lord YHVH and then from the Spirit of God. Here is the Tri-unity as clearly defined as the Hebrew Scriptures make it.

                      There is another passage in Isaiah 63:7 - 14 that also names the Trinity, but it's not as overt...

                      I have dialogued with Christians and Jews over many years, and consider Jews far more knowledgeable about their scriptures than Christians that cling to the Roman Trinity doctrine will ever be.

                      Your references require an extreme stretch of the imagination, anecdotal, and interpretative agenda based on later doctrine and dogma of Old Testament scripture that is just not there. The Jews acknowledge the aspects of God described in their scripture, but belief in the Trinity based on OT scripture is just not there.

                      The better Christian scholars with a degree of objectivity believe the Trinity is an interpretation of OT scripture based on the the New Testament and later interpretation, and not literally described in the OT.

                      I believe the persistence of many Christians to believe in your view and interpretation of the Old Testaments, as well as those that believe in a literal Genesis do indeed document the fact that many believers do indeed live a lie today
                      Last edited by shunyadragon; 05-22-2018, 11:43 AM.
                      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                      go with the flow the river knows . . .

                      Frank

                      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                        I have dialogued with Christians and Jews over many years, and consider Jews far more knowledgeable about their scriptures than Christians that cling to the Roman Trinity doctrine will ever be.


                        Your references require an extreme stretch of the imagination, anecdotal, and interpretative agenda based on later doctrine and dogma of Old Testament scripture that is just not there. The Jews acknowledge the aspects of God described in their scripture, but belief in the Trinity based on OT scripture is just not there.


                        The better Christian scholars with a degree of objectivity believe the Trinity is an interpretation of OT scripture based on the the New Testament and later interpretation, and not literally described in the OT.


                        I believe the persistence of many Christians to believe in your view and interpretation of the Old Testaments, as well as those that believe in a literal Genesis do indeed document the fact that many believers do indeed live a lie today

                        None of this is true or accurate. You're simply using the "poisoning the well" argument. No real refutations displayed...Appeal to authority and hand waving are not real arguments. Saying the Scriptures cited do not say what they say is laughable. Your belief of "many Christians" is also, just that, your mistaken belief. Thanks for playing but it's obvious you do not know what you are talking about.
                        "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

                        "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
                          None of this is true or accurate. You're simply using the "poisoning the well" argument. No real refutations displayed...Appeal to authority and hand waving are not real arguments. Saying the Scriptures cited do not say what they say is laughable. Your belief of "many Christians" is also, just that, your mistaken belief. Thanks for playing but it's obvious you do not know what you are talking about.
                          That part has been obvious for a long time IMO.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                            First, there is no "proof" for god existing or not existing. Those beliefs will be based on where the preponderance of the evidence takes us. For me, the preponderance of the evidence points to "god" being a human creation. There are a lot of data points to that. One is the pattern of human history. One is the divergence of religious beliefs. One is the absence of any experience of such a being on my part. Another is the lack of any credible evidence to the existence of the supernatural from anywhere. Finally, there are the internal inconsistencies in most religions.

                            When I put that all together, I end up believing that humanity has created its gods, primarily in its own image and likeness. I believe the gods of our world exist in our beliefs, and not in objective reality.
                            You are arguing that there is no proof that existence exists. God's identity is being the self Existent. And only uncaused Existence is self Existent. Hence God's identity. One does not need to prove what is self evident. And on top of this God is knowable by way of the gospel of grace.
                            . . . the Gospel of Christ, for it is [the] power of God to salvation to every [one] believing, . . . -- Romans 1:16.

                            . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4.

                            Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by 37818 View Post
                              You are arguing that there is no proof that existence exists.
                              No - I am arguing their is insufficient evidence that any form of supernatural being conventionally known as "god" exists. Of course, if god is equated with "all that is," then you are suggesting a form of pantheism. If all of the existent universe = god, then that is not the conventional definition of "god," AFAIK.

                              Originally posted by 37818 View Post
                              God's identity is being the self Existent. And only uncaused Existence is self Existent. Hence God's identity. One does not need to prove what is self evident. And on top of this God is knowable by way of the gospel of grace.
                              I'll leave this to you. It seems to be a blend of Thomism and ... I'm not sure what. I actually don't have much success following most of your posts or arguments. Your language is a little "out there" for me. Perhaps others are more successful.
                              The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                              I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                                No - I am arguing their is insufficient evidence that any form of supernatural being conventionally known as "god" exists. Of course, if god is equated with "all that is," then you are suggesting a form of pantheism. If all of the existent universe = god, then that is not the conventional definition of "god," AFAIK.
                                You seem to be disallowing the only valid primary concept for God [self Existent, and that uncaused existence is the only thing that is self existent]. And you are making the claim that there can be nothing beyond what ever you are referring to as "nature." i.e. "supernatural."


                                I'll leave this to you. It seems to be a blend of Thomism and ... I'm not sure what. I actually don't have much success following most of your posts or arguments. Your language is a little "out there" for me. Perhaps others are more successful.
                                I reject Thomism and Existentialism. I believe that there is uncaused existence. And that uncaused existence precedes everything. And that uncaused existence is the only thing which qualifies to be God. Fact, God's Hebrew Name has been translated "self Existent." As I have explained only uncaused existence is self existent.
                                Last edited by 37818; 05-22-2018, 05:10 PM.
                                . . . the Gospel of Christ, for it is [the] power of God to salvation to every [one] believing, . . . -- Romans 1:16.

                                . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4.

                                Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by lee_merrill, 10-24-2020, 07:58 PM
                                10 responses
                                38 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post lee_merrill  
                                Started by Esther, 09-27-2020, 02:01 PM
                                57 responses
                                276 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 09-15-2020, 11:19 AM
                                49 responses
                                416 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Tassman
                                by Tassman
                                 
                                Started by shunyadragon, 09-09-2016, 03:27 PM
                                1,037 responses
                                54,176 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post thormas
                                by thormas
                                 
                                Started by showmeproof, 01-19-2014, 11:28 AM
                                91 responses
                                19,197 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Working...
                                X