sylvan3

Thanks for the responses... How about these: Exodus 21:20-21 "And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money." Exodus 21:26-27 "And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye's sake. And if he smite out his manservant's tooth, or his maidservant's tooth; he shall let him go free for his tooth's sake." Not only do these phrases not speak out against slavery, they seem to support it, in addition to addressing issues of being violent with the slave/servant/maid.

Is there any place in the Bible where God speaks out against slavery? I know there are a lot of places where slavery is mentioned in the Bible, but I don't know of anywhere where it says that it is bad and should end.

And, "if" an onmipotent God exists, then logic dictates that nothing is beyond the scope of possibility. Since logic cannot absolutely rule out the existence of God, it must accept the possibility of the impossible. Are you aware that "omnipotent" has been recognized as logically incoherent for the very reason that it would make impossible things possible, thus violating logic? This slant on omnipotence then makes the concept of God illogical (in which I agree) and pushes people legitimately further into the realm of agnosticism. I believe we can comprehend the concept of God about as well as an animal can comprehend the concept of a human being. Just my opinion...

Hi Sylvan3, I hope this explanation will help you. I don't know if you are a follower of Jesus or not, but when you read the Bible you must ask for wisdom and discernment as the Word has layers upon layers , and reading it just off the top of your head can lead to error of understanding. Matt 10:34,35,36,37 Jesus isn't going against earthly relationships but rather no earthly ties, however close, should detract from loyalty for Him, zealous loyalty. Loyalty to the point, even certain family members( Christians) being shunned by others in the family. LNJ Hi LNJ--I appreciate your response. In other words, if it sounds too bad to be true, it probably isn't. This causes problems for me because there are LOTS of people who will cite scripture, literally, to support their points and say, "that's what the Bible says". I understand the need to try to take something positive out of many of the verses. However, I just wonder why Jesus didn't say what he really meant. This makes no sense to me. He may be considered perfect, but if he writes or says something that opens up the possibility of an imperfect interpretation, it kind of lays waste to what was said. This is particularly true of his statement about plucking one's eye out if it offends and cutting off one's hand if it causes sin.

Excellent writing, Emeraldgirl!

Shiloh, as you well know, one of Christianity's mantras is "God has a plan for everyone". If he has a plan, how could humans possibly change this plan which has been established prior to one's birth? By this logic you are part of an already determined course in life. You do not have free will because of God's plan. God is omnipotent and omniscient--how can you change this? This even calls into question the sensibility of prayer--maybe that's why it doesn't work. How can mere mortals change God's plan? He is omniscient and omnipotent, yet we are supposed to change his mind through prayer? When prayer doesn't work, Christians say, "It is part of God's plan". Once again, this underscores the illogicality of Christianity. It is impossible to believe in the illogical. For example, if someone said to you "This is A and it is also not A". What could you believe about A? You wouldn't know whether it is A or not A. That's what we have here. This is why people (some) are UNABLE to accept the so-called "free gift of salvation" that has a requirement that one believe in something illogical. Yes, God has a plan for your life. Not everything is inevitable or written in stone. God also has a Will. God has a perfect Will and a permissive Will. The difference between God's plan and His Will is that His Will is corporate, and His plan is individual. God's WILL is outlined for us in the Bible. God's perfect Will is that everyone would be saved, God's permissive Will allows man to walk away from the offer of salvation. God's perfect Will says that we should not murder. God's permissive Will allows men to make the sinful choice of murdering someone. God's Will is the same for everyone. He has the same love, same standard of righteousness, will give the same forgiveness to anyone who asks. There is one standard for everyone. God's Plan is individual. God calls some people into the mission field, some as Pastors. Others, God calls to simply to work in a lay position in their church. God's plan hinges on His Will. You only find the plan of God for your life when you submit to his Will. Prayer is not for changing God's Will, or for changing God's plan. Prayer is how we find out what the Will of God is. Prayer can be supplicatory, petitionary, or simply an act of worship. You cannot just use the term "prayer" in a generic sense and expect to relate it correctly. It is illogical, since you are operating from a faulty starting point. Of course, if my understanding the Bible were based upon the information as YOU present it, it would not make sense. When you actually know what the Bible says, it does make sense. The Bible does transcend logic, but it does not violate it. God is not in a box and is not limited to doing only what we can comprehend. I am attempting to understand the Bible based on what the concepts of perfection, omniscience, and omnipotence entail. The Bible, because it presents God in anthropomorphic contradictions to those three concepts, most certainly violates logic. Your response to these contradictions is to basically say, "no, it doesn't violate logic", without fully explaining how a perfect deity can create something that he eventually is unhappy with, knowing that he would eventually be unhappy with it, and complaining because he is unhappy with it. This makes no sense, and I don't see how my putting that out there for consideration is some sort of distortion or faulty premise which you frequently assert. Also, by stating that God is not in a box and not limited to what we can comprehend, you are venturing into the area of agnosticism. I frequently hear from Christians that they don't understand God. Well, they apparently understand him well enough that they are comfortable with the concept of a person appearing at Judgment Day and being dropped through the trap door to burn for eternity because the person "didn't understand."(i.e. someone who can't accept Christ because he or she finds the concept illogical due to not understanding the contradictions).

Please explain these verses and how they square with a concept of a peaceful Jesus. Matthew 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. 10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. 10:36 And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. 10:37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

Shiloh, as you well know, one of Christianity's mantras is "God has a plan for everyone". If he has a plan, how could humans possibly change this plan which has been established prior to one's birth? By this logic you are part of an already determined course in life. You do not have free will because of God's plan. God is omnipotent and omniscient--how can you change this? This even calls into question the sensibility of prayer--maybe that's why it doesn't work. How can mere mortals change God's plan? He is omniscient and omnipotent, yet we are supposed to change his mind through prayer? When prayer doesn't work, Christians say, "It is part of God's plan". Once again, this underscores the illogicality of Christianity. It is impossible to believe in the illogical. For example, if someone said to you "This is A and it is also not A". What could you believe about A? You wouldn't know whether it is A or not A. That's what we have here. This is why people (some) are UNABLE to accept the so-called "free gift of salvation" that has a requirement that one believe in something illogical.

Another word that we hear along with onmiscience is omnipotence. If God is both omnipotent and loving, he would do all within his power to stop a person from burning in hell for eternity. This would include forcing his will if necessary to stop a person from burning in hell. This is only logical. If you say that "prophets", "miracles", and "sending his own son to die", are acceptable efforts by God, I would remind you that these supposed events remain unconvincing to many, many people in this world. Many of these people, including myself, have spent a great deal of time attempting to determine the truthfulness of the Bible. We are not deliberately "rejecting" this because we like rejecting things. The way that it has been presented in the Bible is unconvincing (you may think we have not given it an honest effort, but you are flat-out wrong). Ergo, God, being omnipotent and loving, should realize that his methods didn't work. Logic would then tell you that his omnipotence and love would then come forth to prevent someone from burning in hell for eternity for the terribly egregious offense of not understanding, and thus not endorsing, a terribly flawed Bible. As for evidence, I'll keep it simple; how about him actually responding to a prayer to restore an amputated limb? Sorry, omniscience and perfection preclude anger. To not understand this is to not understand omniscience or perfection. Anger, in fact, would be an acknowledgement of imperfection--which God, of course, allowed to develop. There are logical problems for you here. Because I am not convinced that you are sincere in wanting to know. I really don't even have the time to be on here as much as I am, and I will only sacrifice additional time if I feel that your questions about those verses are sincere, since you pose quite a number of them. The explanations are involved, and if you don't really want the answers but actually think your examples will somehow "stump" me, then I don't have time for silly games. Let's let the quotes be as they stand--uncontested by you and seriously questionable in terms of rationality

I guess it all depends on how you define "love". Imagine a parent who watches passively as his or her young child walks off a cliff and then says, "I really loved that kid". It's not love if the parent could stop the child from his or her demise but did nothing--at least not according to my definition. Yours may be different. Actually, if it would guarantee that someone wouldn't burn in hell forever, I would be happy for God to "force" his will. He could start by giving us some real evidence of his existence. I would think that he would want to do that to avoid the "ultimate consequence". But, according to you, he is just as happy to watch someone who has genuine, honest questions go through the trap door for eternal torture. If he is not happy to watch this, he is certainly not grieved enough to stop it in any way--much like the parent watching their child walk off the cliff. Your position is the irrational one. So how can he get "angry" as is so often mentioned in the Bible? Anger occurs when one is unpleasantly surprised about something. This makes no sense: God knows what is going to happen but gets angry when it happens. I am supposed to buy that? I am wrong for questioning that? It's a ridiculous concept. I have read enough to know that it is not divinely inspired--unless you consider ridiculous statements as divine inspiration. I think this is basic to anyone who looks at it objectively. You are the ones who claim that it is perfect. This means that you have to cover every inch of it to assure its perfection. Sorry Shiloh, here is where you lose your argument. I did nothing but quote actual verses from the Bible and ask for rational explanations for them. How can quoting from the Bible be a tactic on my part for smearing God's character? Show me where it is rational to have your child stoned by elders or townspeople. Show me where it is rational to cut off someone's hand and show no pity. Show me where it is rational to put someone to death for working on the Sabbath (why aren't we doing this now?). Show me where it is rational to have a woman in full submission to men. Show me where it is rational to hate your mother, father, brother and sisters, as Jesus taught. Show me where it is rational to "kill all the males among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man by sleeping with him." Followed by "but all the young girls who have not known a man by sleeping with him, keep for yourselves"

I am sorry, but you are attempting to have it both ways, Shiloh. This is like someone saying "you can have this Steelers ticket for free if you give me $100." You would be better off by saying, "God does not place any FURTHER conditions on who or who may not get saved if they follow the INITIAL condition of receiving Jesus." Once again, God, in his omniscience, would know ahead of time (i.e. prior to the person being born) who would not receive Jesus and ultimately be dropped through the trap door on Judgment Day. This is unconditional love? This is justice? Not in my book. It's conditional love and no justice whatsoever for someone who is being honest. As for studying my concepts, I have been respectful of what might constitute the real truth (in the same vein as Emeraldgirl) for about 45 years--shortly after I stopped believing in Santa Claus when I was about eight. One can "say" they believe something and do that voluntarily. Whether or not they truly believe something is involuntary and dependent on numerous factors. Do you think God will know the difference on Judgment Day? Of course he created an imperfect world. He's omniscient--he knew what was going to happen but he created it anyway (I don't think you understand what it means to be omniscient). I don't see where my knowledge that omniscience means knowing what will happen in the future constitutes false pretenses. I don't know how you are so sure about what you are saying. You seem to think that you know what God will be thinking on Judgment Day. I think a lot of people of other denominations might disagree with you. Just my opinion... I know the Bible says the following: (please enlighten me as to the rationality of this) Deut 25:11-12 11 If men get into a fight with one another, and the wife of one intervenes to rescue her husband from the grip of his opponent by reaching out and seizing his genitals, 12you shall cut off her hand; show no pity. or Deut 21:18-21 18 If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father and mother, who does not heed them when they discipline him, 19 then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his town at the gate of that place. 20They shall say to the elders of his town,

Of course it is conditional. The condition is that the person must believe in the Bible in order not to be tortured for eternity (which you consider to be "just"). That is a condition--there is no other way of looking at it. This is particularly evident when one considers that beliefs are not truly under a person's control. People can say they believe something but not truly believe it. If I told you that the local youth (ages 12-15) football team could beat the Pittsburgh Steelers ten times in a row in a series of legitimate football games, could you believe this? Of course not--even if you wanted to believe it (i.e. maybe you don't like the Steelers and you really like the youth football team). In fact, there are many people who you know that may say they believe in Christ who truly, deep down, don't believe it for reasons that are out of their control (you might be a very surprised person someday!) They could be lying to you or themselves. Is it OK to lie to yourself? Which takes more character, to be honest with yourself and others, or to say you believe something you don't truly believe? Ergo, given the fact that the Bible is extremely difficult to interpret (how about Revelations?), contains many contradictory passages (faith vs. works being one), is illogical (perfect deity creates an imperfect world), and is interpreted in numerous ways (200 church denominations, I believe), it goes beyond normal reason to "require" that someone believe this in order to avoid eternal torture. There is something wrong with a philosophy that is of this type of conditional nature. It can't be a free gift, if someone is unable to accept it.

I like Emeraldgirl's viewpoints. Shiloh's comments about "rebellion" and what happens to those who supposedly rebel (by being honest about their feelings, no less) underscores a major problem with Christianity. This is that God's love is conditional--the condition being that one has to believe in Jesus in order to avoid eternal torture. Since we all know that the greatest love is unconditional love, why is it that God does not practice this? It is important to understand that if God, because of his omniscience, knew that someone was going to reject him (prior to that person being born), God is, therefore, creating a person that he knows he will send to hell. This clearly does not square with what the traditional concept of God is (i.e. God is love).

I have always wondered how people can reconcile the incompatibility of a perfect deity creating imperfect humans--humans that he is not happy with (see the story on Noah's Ark). The "God gave us free will" argument doesn't work; God, because of his omniscience, would know ahead of time what humans were going to do. How could he get "angry" if things weren't going as planned? How could he be omnipotent if things weren't going his way? Don't forget, the flood didn't rid the world of evil as was the original intent.