Where in the Bible is the Christian God Cruel and/or Incompetent...

[Trailblazer]

Some people argue that throwing out or ignoring the old testament would be good. I disagree with that

Because it's like handpicking things or wanting things to be a certain way, when they ain't. Said in another way, it is to manipulate the truth and by that I don't mean whether the old testament is correct or not. But rather like someone saying that the holocaust ought to be removed from the history books, because its too cruel and they rather not believe it happened.
That doesn't really fly with me, a person have all the rights to not believe in the old testament, but to argue that it should be "removed" or "hidden" away, because they can't justify or accept it, because they want God to be something else, that is unacceptable unless they can provide sufficient evidence for why the old testament is false or a more incorrect description of God, than what they believe.

So God wouldn't make any more sense, if you removed it. Neither would Jesus, if the OT weren't there and I don't really like his teachings either.

I see your point, with the Bible it is all or nothing, as otherwise it is just like trying to cover up the mess, and it is all one big mess, OT and NT. I guess I was reflecting on what would make sense to me.

I have to agree with you, and the most logical answer to why I think that is the case, is probably not to difficult to guess.

Yes, I know your answer. No guessing required.

 

[Trailblazer]

Answer to our question???? I'd settle for a "Boo!" from God.

Me too, but we are not going to get that either.

 

[SA Huguenot]

Exactly, and without sufficient evidence no less.



The demonstration is what I focus on as well as comparing Christian's morality with the God of the Bibles rather than critiquing the God himself. So Christians say that they are peaceful and God is good. I would ask that if they were alive back in OT days would they be fine with killing people if God commanded? If not, why not? Most responses I get is that they are glad they aren't living in those times.

OK, Lets take all the facts into consideration.
1. You are living in an encampment where you have a tabernacle in the centre of 1.2 million people.
2. You left with these people from Egypt, where you firsthandedly saw how God saved your nation and you from slavery and destruction where the King attempted Genocide on you, your family, and your nation.
3. You saw how a God, who occupies the tabernacle with a bright light and a voice like thunder, saved you time and again from death, and were one of the people who walked through the red sea whilst this glory of God kept Egypt away from you.
4. you saw how this God shone on top of a mountain, you Heard His voive, you saw Moses returned shining as bright as the sun for meeting this God.
5. You saw miracles and saw how those rebelious people who tried to tell God what to do was judged for their rebellion in full view of Israel.
6. You know 100% that Moses is the mouthpiece of God, not becaue of what Moses claimed, like Muhammad did, but because God Himself spoke to Israel in person, and they were frightened for this thunder and bright light.

Now, in a situation like this I will take up my sword and fight if I was commanded by this prophet.
Deut 18: 18 to 22
My question is, if you experienced all these factors, will you arm yourself and come with me to do as was instructed by God?

,I also challenge their ideas based on what I have learnt about indoctrination but that is a complicated issue.

I think I do understand your point about emotional toil and not being affected. I had the same issue in my previous religion. All those around me joined because of emotional reasons and their emotional struggles whereas my life was fine, I was just in it because of what I was convinced of. But then I came to realize that I was low key depressed which is why I joined. These days I am happy and don't have that depression even and don't need religion to make me happy. Is that similar to your case?

I was a person who laughed at the Bible and Christians.
I was an atheist, agnostic and pessimist.
I grew up in the protestant Dutch church, and at 21 I did not believe in any divine being anymore.
I liked to mock any religious person, and one day was given the video of Zakir Naik and William Cambell's debate in 2000 in Chicago.
It was a Muslim employer who promised me that if I watch this video, I will learn the truth and "come to God"

I watched the video, and thought it was incredible knowledge, and I could use Zakir Naik's information to destroy the Bible and Christian thought if I learn what he knows.
I found out he used Maurice Buchaille's book, the Bible and Quran in relation to science.

Remember I said I am very sceptic and pessimistic if it comes to religion and claims made by Christians, and I scrutinised Naik's and Buchailles' work, and investigated thei claims about the Bible I soooo wanted to prove wrong.
I was totally agrivated that everything Naik and Buchaille claimes, was one big lie!
They (again superficially) made up some claim on what the Bible said, and when I tried to collect supportive evidence in the Bible to destroy it, I found only the opposite.
After 2 years of studying the Bible, science, and the Quran, I had to admit that the Bible was the one sole book from ancient times that can not be proven anythin else than true.

Today I believe in Jesus as my saviour, who is the Word (Mind) of YHWH, and the Holy ghost, who is the Spirit of YHWH, and YHWH the Father, who is the existance of the Trinity.
There is no other way but to accept Jesus to gain everlasting imortal life.

 

[SA Huguenot]

I see your point, with the Bible it is all or nothing, as otherwise it is just like trying to cover up the mess, and it is all one big mess, OT and NT. I guess I was reflecting on what would make sense to me.

Why would you find it as such.
I find it inspirational, true, historically correct, scientifically the source of all modern science....etc.

 

[SA Huguenot]

1. So when God created man with free will, did he undo his former perfection or was his creation still perfect after the creation of man?
2. According to the story, man did not choose to be moral beings, which must mean that either God's creation was not perfect or it was exactly as he wanted it?

Thank you for this post. it is very deep in thought.
Not a lot of people think this way, and you somehow have a gift to explain exaclty what you mean.

I wish I have enough time to answer everyone's response, but I can only go through and on face value decide on who to answer.
Then I dont even get time enough to go through all the posts.

But yours is the ultimate question which I also had a problem with concerning the philosophical question of, ...

"If God created Satan, Sin, Evil, death and pain, is he not Evil Himself ?
If He did not create these bad things, is He realy Omnipotent, Omniscient, and Omnipresent?"

Well, I can only give you my understanding of who God is. I will tell ou what my interperetation is about this, but heavilly supported by what I found in the Bible.

1. God is all knowing, and obviously should have known that Evil will enter in His creation.
*This point is strengtened by the fact that Jesus was very clear that His execution was forseen "before the foundation of the Earth."
2. Death entered into God's creation and was not "Created" by God.
* I understand it as such that God is life and light, and in Him there is no darkness at all.
*Death is the absence of Life, which renders that death is the abscence of God.
3. If there is a place in the creation where people will be kept away from God, does it mean He is not Omnipresent?
*I had a problem with "how is it possible that people can be dead, kept in hell, but God is not in Hell." (I think I was perhaps the first to think about it, hopefully so)
4. Then the creation of free will where God made Man to choose to sin obviously shows that He knew Man will sin, Satan will seduce, death and pain will appear.

Now my conclusion.
God did create everything.
But he also gave free choice to what he created.
But it must be understood that God created everything to be immortal, from the ennergy, matter and life Nothing will just dissappear.
Then I understood the principle of Adam and Eve created in God's immage. They were also created immortal. They were covered in a bright light as God wears light as clothing, and they did not know they were naked.
God told them not to eat a certain fruit (because if they do they will die which renders that they were immortal), but they allowed to be deceived by evil, which God also created good without sin, but with free will.
When Adam and eve sinned, they lost their immortality, and started to age.
In other words, they were dying. You and I are nothing more than living corpses that deteriorates as time passes, untill such time as our bodies totally fail.
Now, before Adam and Eve lost their immortal bodies, they were able to be in the presence of God with no ill effects. But thereafter No Human could be in the presence of the glorious life giving body of God. They will simply just "burn out" so to speak due to this corrupted mortalbody we live in.
God then gave Adam and Eve clothing from skin by slaughtering animals. This blood was the covering of Adam and Eve from destruction in the presence of God. for some reason, blood covers our sinfull nature, and protects our mortal bodies from "burning out" in Gods' presence.
therefore, we all needed blood offerings to cover our sinfull bodies, and Jesus was the ultimate blood sacrifice that covered the world's sin from the face of God, thereby ending the need for eternal sacrifices.

OK, so what does this all have to do with your question.
This is the one side of the story we should understand about "HOW" God created us humans, and how we were corrupted in our existance, and how it affects God's relation with us.
The other side of the story is made up of one simple answer to a simple question.

"Why did God create us?"
The answer is: "He was alone and wanted something to be his friend and to love that someone."
I think about it as such.
God wanted to have companionship, and decided to create the best of friends He could possibly make.
He decided to create a free thinking free willed creature, that could decide for themself if they want to be His friend!

This Omniscent God knew that giving free will, will result in rebellion, evil, death, but He also knew that out of the masses of souls He created, there will be those who will love him back.
just for this reason, He decided that it was worth His while to make us.
He also knew that there will be terrible people, who will breech all moral rules written in our conscience, and He knew they will forever be removed from His presence, but will for eternity feel the "burning" of their corrupted spirits by His omnipresence.

Now, is this rightious God, who gave humans a chance of life, realy bad because there are people who doomed themself?
All I can see is this God who eventually decided it worth while to gain a friend, and to judge the ones who had no regard for any life, had the right to do as He chose.
We have the right to choose too.

And yes, God did not create evil, but allowed free choice, to ensure that who loves him does so out of free will.
Just think what a foolish god He would have been if He forced us all to love Him.
Little robots running around him with no mind at all.

Therefore, The above actually demonstrates the Omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence of YHWH.

Anyway, thats how I got it.
And again, thank you for your thoughts and thinking.

 

[SA Huguenot]

I see your point, with the Bible it is all or nothing, as otherwise it is just like trying to cover up the mess, and it is all one big mess, OT and NT. I guess I was reflecting on what would make sense to me.

Yes, I know your answer. No guessing required.

Even though I dont like the tone of calling the Bible a mess, which it is not, I do agree with the fact that without the OT, any one calling himself a Christian denying the OT, becomes an idolator.
They create a different god to the God of the Bible.

 

[firedragon]

The problem is knowing the difference between attacking god written in the bible and attacking the god of the bible.

For example, I can tell you I dislike how Terminator killed the bad guys but if I said that to Arnold Swarzeneger fans, they'd know the difference if I'm talking about the character Terminator or the actor.

I'm not sure how my point relates to Stalin and Hitler. I'm just saying there's a difference between criticizing what's written about a person and criticizing the person himself.

Thats an excellent point. Its an obvious point, but most people of course neglect whats obvious for the sake of argument.

 

[firedragon]

Do you know that a global flood is the only explanation to the Earth's current geological formation?

I would like to read your data about this.

 

[Samael_Khan]

OK, Lets take all the facts into consideration.
1. You are living in an encampment where you have a tabernacle in the centre of 1.2 million people.
2. You left with these people from Egypt, where you firsthandedly saw how God saved your nation and you from slavery and destruction where the King attempted Genocide on you, your family, and your nation.
3. You saw how a God, who occupies the tabernacle with a bright light and a voice like thunder, saved you time and again from death, and were one of the people who walked through the red sea whilst this glory of God kept Egypt away from you.
4. you saw how this God shone on top of a mountain, you Heard His voive, you saw Moses returned shining as bright as the sun for meeting this God.
5. You saw miracles and saw how those rebelious people who tried to tell God what to do was judged for their rebellion in full view of Israel.
6. You know 100% that Moses is the mouthpiece of God, not becaue of what Moses claimed, like Muhammad did, but because God Himself spoke to Israel in person, and they were frightened for this thunder and bright light.

Now, in a situation like this I will take up my sword and fight if I was commanded by this prophet.
Deut 18: 18 to 22
My question is, if you experienced all these factors, will you arm yourself and come with me to do as was instructed by God?

There is not sufficient evidence to know that God did those things, just a being claiming to be God if you see or hear the being at all. But certainly you would be knowing that something is happening and it is a safe bet that hanging around in this group will keep you safe. Certainly an awe inspiring experience. I mean they wouldn't 100% know that Moses as the mouthpiece of God because thunder and bright light and all the other experiences aren't things that have to be attributed to God. And I can understand why they would join the fighting, for tribal reasons.

But my point was that it is if a Christian has that viewpoint of God being peaceful. These examples would demonstrate that he is not. Certainly if a christian agrees with me about God not being peaceful then I would not use that line of argumentation.

I was a person who laughed at the Bible and Christians.
I was an atheist, agnostic and pessimist.
I grew up in the protestant Dutch church, and at 21 I did not believe in any divine being anymore.
I liked to mock any religious person, and one day was given the video of Zakir Naik and William Cambell's debate in 2000 in Chicago.
It was a Muslim employer who promised me that if I watch this video, I will learn the truth and "come to God"

I watched the video, and thought it was incredible knowledge, and I could use Zakir Naik's information to destroy the Bible and Christian thought if I learn what he knows.
I found out he used Maurice Buchaille's book, the Bible and Quran in relation to science.

Remember I said I am very sceptic and pessimistic if it comes to religion and claims made by Christians, and I scrutinised Naik's and Buchailles' work, and investigated thei claims about the Bible I soooo wanted to prove wrong.
I was totally agrivated that everything Naik and Buchaille claimes, was one big lie!
They (again superficially) made up some claim on what the Bible said, and when I tried to collect supportive evidence in the Bible to destroy it, I found only the opposite.
After 2 years of studying the Bible, science, and the Quran, I had to admit that the Bible was the one sole book from ancient times that can not be proven anythin else than true.

Today I believe in Jesus as my saviour, who is the Word (Mind) of YHWH, and the Holy ghost, who is the Spirit of YHWH, and YHWH the Father, who is the existance of the Trinity.
There is no other way but to accept Jesus to gain everlasting imortal life.

I was a skeptic too. Then I became a believer. I preached almost every weekend for 7 years. I studied the Bible intensely. Now I am not a believer anymore.

By the way I know about Naik and Buchailles and they certainly lie about the Bible. (The Bible being canonised at the Council of Nicea is a special pet peeve of mine that still irritates me). But, the big muslim critic whose books I read were Ahmed Deedat, a fellow South African of ours who was world famous for criticising the Bible and Christians. Needless to say that by studying his stuff I now find it easy to refute muslim claims against the Bible and claims that Muhammed is prophecied in the Bible. Thos guys lied through their teeth to discredit Christianity. And Deedat also played a role in me becoming christian.

Thanks for sharing your experience. Glad to know that someone else has investigated muslim claims against the Bible and have come to similar conclusions.

 

[SA Huguenot]

I would like to read your data about this.

on another day, another thread

 

[firedragon]

on another day, another thread

I asked because you made the claim.

But of course, its your prerogative. Have a good day.

 

[Colt]

God didn't write the Bile, humans wrote the Bible as if God were speaking. Therefore the God of the Bible is a God created in the image of the Men who wrote it based on their understanding of God over the ages.

 

[SA Huguenot]

But my point was that it is if a Christian has that viewpoint of God being peaceful. These examples would demonstrate that he is not. Certainly if a christian agrees with me about God not being peaceful then I would not use that line of argumentation.

Christians never claimed God is a peacefull hippie.
No, God is a rightious and fair God, who sees all and will have His vengance on those that rebelled against Him and what He created.
The God you speak of does not exist, at least not in the Bible.
YHWH will judge every single soul, and will ensure that rightiousness and salvation succeeds.

lets put it this way, do you think a judge who sentences a murderer to death, is a murderer, or is that Judge acting on behalf of the victim who was murdered?

And please allow me to add.
My proposition on the instructions of God to the Israelites to kill the nations in Canaan is purely based on the reasons and circumstances recorded in the OT where there was a living God amongst Israel, and a Prophet who PROoFED that he was acting on God's command.
You can make it some tribal environment with thunder and lightning, but that will not be the recording of the Torah.

Furthermore, I was asked if I will join Israel in killing someone on the instruction of God, to which I gave the explicit circumstances on when I will do it.

Lets say for instance that someone comes to me and say I must kill Sammy.
He tells me he is a prophet and God told him to relay the message to me.
I will then have the right to test this guy by asking him to proof he is a prophet of YHWH.
Deut 18: 18 to 22 gives the recipy.
This person must be able to tell me what will happen tomorrow and the near future.
Therefore I will ask him, something like, what will the heading be word for word in some specific newspaper.

And again, Deut 18-22 says, if this person can not do that, I have the right to Kill him for being an impostor, and not a prophet.
Obviously I should take him to Moses and the elders who will judge on the Law.

Now, it is very important to note that....
Only the OT God, YHWH, in all the ancient and religious books allows you to test Him.
Therefore, the Instruction by Moses to Israel was a valid instruction, and something I will do if such happens to me.





;18-22

 

[SA Huguenot]

I asked because you made the claim.

But of course, its your prerogative. Have a good day.

In the meantime I advise you read Immanuel Kant's "Universal natural history and theory of the heavens or essay on the constitution and the mechanical origin of the whole universe according to Newtonian principles"
http://users.clas.ufl.edu/burt/spaceshotsairheads/kantuniversalnaturalhistory.pdf
Here you have the very first philosopher (who almost memorised the whole Bible) took Genesis, listened to Swedenborg, studied Genesis, and came up with the Nebular theory (which Laplace tried to change), but Kant's theory was found to be the only one correct in 1925 when Hubble looked through the Mnt Wilson tellescope and confirmed what Kant wrote in 1755.

And to the shock of many Atheists, Their science they claim (Nebular theory / Big Bang) to be evidence that the Bible is wrong, was plagerised form Genesis.

This fact to me is most humerous, and I love it when I see the atheist squrm, jiggle, and use all the tricks in the Atheists' argument handbook to explain it away.
It is just lovely to know that Modern science, had it's beginning in the one book the atheist hates most, the Bible.
No wonder Isaac Newton said that he studied the Bible throughout his life and could not find a single error or contradiction when comparing it with experimental and theoretical science.

OK, I have Isaac Newton, and Immanuel Kant on my side.

 

[SA Huguenot]

By the way I know about Naik and Buchailles and they certainly lie about the Bible. (The Bible being canonised at the Council of Nicea is a special pet peeve of mine that still irritates me). But, the big muslim critic whose books I read were Ahmed Deedat, a fellow South African of ours who was world famous for criticising the Bible and Christians. Needless to say that by studying his stuff I now find it easy to refute muslim claims against the Bible and claims that Muhammed is prophecied in the Bible. Thos guys lied through their teeth to discredit Christianity. And Deedat also played a role in me becoming christian.

Yip.
If it was not for Ahmad Deedad and the IPCI, I would also not have learned the details of the Bible, the Quran and Hadith.
It took me years to study his accusations on contradictions, obscenities and errors in the Bible, and I could not get what he said.
What Deedad did was to prevent Muslims in South Africa to read the Bible for themself, and in his combat kit, he made sure that the muslims take his word for what is written in the Bible.
His writings were combined in one book, The Choice, and allowed me to know exactly what his propaganda was made from.
Funny enough, the accusation that YHWH was a slave monger and baby killer is what made me to decide to open this thread.

What I like to do is to go to a public forum which will have the scope of the topic I am studying, in this case the Violence of the OT, and to open a thread to test my investigation and the information I collected.
I then discuss it with anyone who replies, and make my final opinion on what the propagandist say, versus what the Bible says.
in this method, I learn to what strenght the opposing "thought tank's" facts represents, and if there are any other details I did not know about.
This way I am gaining more and more information.
And it is obviously very nice to speak to people with other viewpoints than mine.
Greetings

 

[Samael_Khan]

Christians never claimed God is a peacefull hippie.
No, God is a rightious and fair God, who sees all and will have His vengance on those that rebelled against Him and what He created.
The God you speak of does not exist, at least not in the Bible.
YHWH will judge every single soul, and will ensure that rightiousness and salvation succeeds.

Christians have actually claimed that he is a peaceful hippie. Not all of them but a lot of them. And I agree with you. So we have no disagreement here. I and I respect you for acknowledging that and not being a "tickle the ears" christian.

l

ets put it this way, do you think a judge who sentences a murderer to death, is a murderer, or is that Judge acting on behalf of the victim who was murdered?

Before we go there, I am not one of those people who considers a creator a murderer. The potter can do whatever he wishes with the pot. So that is why I didn't discuss the morality argument.

And please allow me to add.
My proposition on the instructions of God to the Israelites to kill the nations in Canaan is purely based on the reasons and circumstances recorded in the OT where there was a living God amongst Israel, and a Prophet who PROoFED that he was acting on God's command.
You can make it some tribal environment with thunder and lightning, but that will not be the recording of the Torah.

This raises the question of how does one know that God is communicating with them and demonstrating that he exists? But regardless of that I can understand why people thought it was a God. People didn't need much to believe such things then. That is why there are so many sun Gods in ancient religions.

Furthermore, I was asked if I will join Israel in killing someone on the instruction of God, to which I gave the explicit circumstances on when I will do it.

Lets say for instance that someone comes to me and say I must kill Sammy.
He tells me he is a prophet and God told him to relay the message to me.
I will then have the right to test this guy by asking him to proof he is a prophet of YHWH.
Deut 18: 18 to 22 gives the recipy.
This person must be able to tell me what will happen tomorrow and the near future.
Therefore I will ask him, something like, what will the heading be word for word in some specific newspaper.

Were OT prophets ever so specific about events that they could tell you minute details of something? And did they prophecy what a person requested or what God wished to reveal. And why would being able to predict the future be proof that he is a prophet of God? Why assume that only God's prophets can do that?

And again, Deut 18-22 says, if this person can not do that, I have the right to Kill him for being an impostor, and not a prophet.
Obviously I should take him to Moses and the elders who will judge on the Law.

I thought it was that if a prophet prophecies and it does not come true then he can be killed. Not that you must ask him to make a specific prophecy about something. That isn't how it works if I recall.

Now, it is very important to note that....
Only the OT God, YHWH, in all the ancient and religious books allows you to test Him.
Therefore, the Instruction by Moses to Israel was a valid instruction, and something I will do if such happens to me.
;18-22

Have you read up on all the different Gods in all the different religions to know that there isn't another God that can be tested? Also this is a criteria for testing someone who claims to be a prophet of God, not YHWH himself.

 

[ChristineM]

again, a very superficial statement with no real substance on the reasons why God did as He did.
God did not create bad people at all.
In fact God created evering good, and for instance, God created Adam and Eve to live forever, and yet to have the choice to decide if they wanted to love God and to follow His example, or to break His covenant with the first chance of seduction bu another created being who rebelled againt God himself.
Due to man deciding not to listen to God, but to break the one rule He gave them, they brought destruction on the whole of creation. They became mortal and their descendends eventually also rebelled against God, just like the atheist of today. These people demanded that there is no God to which they will answer, and learned that moral law is something you choose to adhere to, or to discard.
They realised that if they wanted anything, working for it was too difficuilt, but stealing and killing can also achieve the same goal, especially if you dont have to answer to anyone.
Now, the atheists' acounter argument follows the next route in saying, as you do, why did God not create humans and by his almighty will created them so SIN would not enter the World.
Simple.
Do you know the philosophical statement:
If you love something, set it free..
If it loves you, it will return,
if it doesnt, it would never be.

You want to prescribe to God on how He should have created you, but you dont even realise that with your free will, God gave you the opportunity to decide if you will return His love for you.



Why this accusation of me cherry picking.
I am the one actually attempting to collect all the eggs in one basket, to check what the global story comprises of.
You are the one that superficially make claims on what God did to the "inocent ancient people" without even taking all the facts into consideration.


I made a full study of the OT facts on Slavery, and I was amaised to see that the OT God never instituted slavery as did the Muslim and Portuguese did in the past.
The term "Slave" and the institution of Slave holders in Israel was nothin more than a method to save a family who turned poor from destruction.
However, this is a total topic for another thread on another day.
All I want you to consider for now is the following rules made by God.
If a family turned desolate, they can sell one of their members to another rich family to save themself.
This person will work for at most 6 years, and be allowed to be set free.
He must be paid in advance, which will be the money received by his family. Think about it...6 years of income at once.
You were not allowed to hurt this slave, for even if he looses a tooth, he will be set froo with out any compensation for his owner.
If he one day leaves his tem of employment, he must be compensated on the rule of his master's increased estate. Just think of the huge severance package he will get for his labour.
He will have all the civil rights as his fellow countrymen.
If a girl is sold to save her family, she will have all the civil liberties too.
She will not be used for a sex slave, and the laws of rape, and adultery applies to her master, just as to any other person.
If he intends to marry her, but somehow grows to dislike her, he will not be able to let her return. If he does set her free, the same severance pay applies.
furthermore, there were more legislation in Israel given by God to prevent any of these slaves to be sold to another nation.
And Israel were warned not to mistreat any stranger. this includes orher persons not Hebrews. For Israel was a stranger in Egypt, and they were made slaves.
and lastly, there was laws of capital punnishment for anyone who stole a human.
Therefore, take the above into consideration and come back to tell me the God of the OT was a slave monger.
Again, superficial accusations is nothing more than deception.
Greetings

You are welcome to your opinion and your interpretation, you asked a question in your op, i provided a link that answers your question, you refuse to consider contents of that link but paper over it with excuses based on opinion and time travel. I therefore see your op as a complete waste of time and consider it an accuse for bashing all those who don't follow your interpretations.

According to the book god created people, an an onmi everything he should have done the job property, he didn't snd therefore threw several tantrums to obliterate his error. End of story

 

[firedragon]

In the meantime I advise you read Immanuel Kant's "Universal natural history and theory of the heavens or essay on the constitution and the mechanical origin of the whole universe according to Newtonian principles"
http://users.clas.ufl.edu/burt/spaceshotsairheads/kantuniversalnaturalhistory.pdf
Here you have the very first philosopher (who almost memorised the whole Bible) took Genesis, listened to Swedenborg, studied Genesis, and came up with the Nebular theory (which Laplace tried to change), but Kant's theory was found to be the only one correct in 1925 when Hubble looked through the Mnt Wilson tellescope and confirmed what Kant wrote in 1755.

And to the shock of many Atheists, Their science they claim (Nebular theory / Big Bang) to be evidence that the Bible is wrong, was plagerised form Genesis.

This fact to me is most humerous, and I love it when I see the atheist squrm, jiggle, and use all the tricks in the Atheists' argument handbook to explain it away.
It is just lovely to know that Modern science, had it's beginning in the one book the atheist hates most, the Bible.
No wonder Isaac Newton said that he studied the Bible throughout his life and could not find a single error or contradiction when comparing it with experimental and theoretical science.

OK, I have Isaac Newton, and Immanuel Kant on my side.

I am interested in the particular claim you made about the Global floods being the only explanation. Since you are not interested in providing evidence for that, you can leave it like that. No problem. None of this is relevant to me.

Thanks.

 

[SA Huguenot]

Were OT prophets ever so specific about events that they could tell you minute details of something? And did they prophecy what a person requested or what God wished to reveal. And why would being able to predict the future be proof that he is a prophet of God? Why assume that only God's prophets can do that?

Again, I can only say what the Bible says.

Deu 18:15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;
Deu 18:16 According to all that thou desiredst of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.
Deu 18:17 And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken.
Deu 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
Deu 18:19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.
Deu 18:20 But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.
Deu 18:21 And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken?
Deu 18:22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

This is what the Bible says was spoken from God, and this is what I will adhere to.
in verse 20 God gives me the method to identify a false prophet, and commands that Moses executes that person.
in verse 22 God clearly says that this prophet MUST be able to give future prophecies, and if he is wrong, go to verse 20.

And yes, all the prophets of Israel were "tested".
There are instances recorded of prophets who were false, and who were executed.
obviously those that gave a prophecy did so when the power of the Spirit of God came over him or her.
Everyone would learn about these seers, or prophets, and will monitor their prophecies.
These persons was hated by some kings, and feared by the populous, because they knew God was with these men.
Even if this prophet would make the slightest of error, it would have given their enemies reason to get rid of them.
Anyhow, the prophets of old was someone not to play with, and everyone knew to do as was told by them.

I came to a church some time ago, and was told about this wonderfull prophet they had.
Needless to say, he cursed me for telling him that I want to know what will happen tomorrow.
False prophet, I replied.
Then again I was in a congregation where people gave prophecies as they were filled with the Spirit of God, and things was said that only I knew.
My opinion, God was there!

 

[SA Huguenot]

I am interested in the particular claim you made about the Global floods being the only explanation. Since you are not interested in providing evidence for that, you can leave it like that. No problem. None of this is relevant to me.

Thanks.

OK, But go and read Kants' essay.
Or go to Nicolae Stenno who was the father of geology and Cristalisation, who explained the current geological earth by means of a global flood in 1660.
Oh, He was a Bible believing Christian too.
OK, I dont mean to offend you, but Kant, Newton and Stenno is a good start to see where the current scientists got their information from.
Just a pitty they dont acknowledge the sources of their scientific claims.
The Bible.