How can you be a True Christian™ if you don't take the Eden story literally?

[Subduction Zone]

I believe the removal of the knowledge of evil does not leave us witless but it does make us better off.

Why? How? A simple belief is of no value. I could believe that eating pickles guarantees a place in heaven. Does that help any argument that I make at all?

 

[Muffled]

It is too bad that you do not understand it then. Is God omnipotent? Is God omniscient?

I believe I understand everything.
God is omnipotent and omniscient.

 

[Muffled]

Not very wise to believe this.

Great, a whole new interpretation of the Bible that isn’t consistent with the text. And even Jews don’t take it literally, and it’s their book. But Christians are going to come along and say Jews are wrong? Not very wise.

I believe it is wise to believe that. I believe it is fantasy to believe it is not inspired.

I believe it wouldn't be the first time Jews have been wrong about things.

 

[Muffled]

Why? How? A simple belief is of no value. I could believe that eating pickles guarantees a place in heaven. Does that help any argument that I make at all?

I believe it should be obvious; removal of evil leaves a great deal of good wit since that is not removed. I believe the pickle theory would be baseless.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe it should be obvious; removal of evil leaves a great deal of good wit since that is not removed. I believe the pickle theory would be baseless.

One does not remove evil by removing the knowledge of it. In fact that can make things far worse. The worst evils that I can think of were often done by people that did not realize that what they were doing was wrong in the first place. Your argument fails and since you could not refute my pickle argument it still stands.

You have been defeated by a pickle!!

 

[InChrist]

None of the Jesus myth makes any sense, whether the Old Testament is considered true or not. The absurdity is that God created the world as it is, but then things went so bad with humans after thje Fall that God had to flood the earth to get rid of sin (that didn't work, as we know.) So sin got bad as the populations grews and then the next fix was to get a woman pregnant so eventually the son would be executed as a sacrifice to God so the sins of mankind would be atoned. Did it really fix anything? Not that we can tell.

So God wasn't powerful enough to just forgive the sins of mankind without killing a guy? No, it's absurd to believe literally. This story is obviously symbolic and not real.

I suggest most of Christianity is a bounced check.

Contrary to your faulty perspective, history simply shows that God is very patient with humanity, giving opportunity after opportunity for change and repentance from doing wrong. God is powerful enough to destroy humanity in an instant, yet He doesn’t. The scriptures are clear that the penalty for sin is death. God choose to pay that penalty for you and everyone.

 

[InChrist]

Sorry, but the concept of substitutionary atonement is just garbage when one analyzes it. The idea of a sacrifice goes back to old concepts of primitive religions that think that someone or something has to be to blame for wrongs. If one believes in an omniscient omnipotent God then the ultimate fault of all problems are his. I need to refer back to the Matt Dillahunty quote:

"God sacrificed himself to himself to save us from himself, in order to act as a loophole for a completely messed up system that he himself is also ultimately responsible for."

Do you see how that refutes your claim?

No, it doesn’t refute the biblical claim and truth…” the wages of sin is death”. That is justice. According to the scriptures, God in His mercy and love paid for our sins and met the requirements of justice.

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift ofGod is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23

 

[F1fan]

Contrary to your faulty perspective, history simply shows that God is very patient with humanity, giving opportunity after opportunity for change and repentance from doing wrong. God is powerful enough to destroy humanity in an instant, yet He doesn’t. The scriptures are clear that the penalty for sin is death. God choose to pay that penalty for you and everyone.

God isn’t known to exist. Don’t confuse your religious texts as historical.

 

[F1fan]

No, it doesn’t refute the biblical claim and truth…” the wages of sin is death”. That is justice. According to the scriptures, God in His mercy and love paid for our sins and met the requirements of justice.

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift ofGod is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23

The beliefs you have via your interpretation of the Bible are CLAIMS that are not verified by sufficient evidence. You can’t criticize others for being critical thinkers while you believe on faith.

 

[F1fan]

I believe it is wise to believe that. I believe it is fantasy to believe it is not inspired.

You already said this. You haven’t explained how belief in non-factual ideas is wise. It shows poor judgment.

I believe it wouldn't be the first time Jews have been wrong about things.

Irrelevant. You haven’t explained how you are correct and they are wrong about their OWN BOOK. Your belief is irrelevant and self-serving. A wise person would know this.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, it doesn’t refute the biblical claim and truth…” the wages of sin is death”. That is justice. According to the scriptures, God in His mercy and love paid for our sins and met the requirements of justice.

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift ofGod is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23

No, it does not. You are making the irrational assumption that God is moral when the Bible tells us quite clearly that he is not if one takes the book at all literally.

Nor did you refute anything. You first need a rational and consistent definition of morality to even begin to make such a statement.

 

[InChrist]

The beliefs you have via your interpretation of the Bible are CLAIMS that are not verified by sufficient evidence. You can’t criticize others for being critical thinkers while you believe on faith.

I’m not criticizing you or others, yet I don’t consider you to be solely a critical thinker, nor are my beliefs based solely on faith without evidence. Evidence abounds which supports reasonable faith in a Creator and the biblical text; the universe, creation, historical, archaeological, and prophetic.


“… reason and evidence may legitimately point the direction for faith to go—and must do so. Indeed, faith must not violate evidence and reason or it would be irrational. Faith takes a step beyond reason but only in the direction that reason and evidence have pointed.

The idea of a “leap of faith” (that faith must be irrational) has been promoted by some schools of philosophy and religion. If that were true, however, there would be no basis other than feelings or intuition for what one believes. As a consequence, one could believe or have faith in any-thing.”


“One must have some evidence even to believe there is a God. Otherwise, how could the idea of God be sustained?

Thankfully, the evidence is all around us: “The heavens declare the glory of God. . . . For the invisible things of him [God] from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead, so that they [all mankind] are without excuse” (Psalm:19:1; Romans:1:20). One cannot learn very much of the incredible nature of the universe, from the beautiful simplicity of the atomic structure of the elements to the incomprehensible complexity of a living cell with ten thousand chemical reactions going on at once in perfect balance with one another, without realizing that it couldn’t have happened by chance.”

In Defense of the Faith

Our monthly feature excerpted from Dave Hunt's book of the same title. What Role Do Evidence and Reason Play? Question: I can see that it makes no sense and would be very dang

www.thebereancall.org

 

[Subduction Zone]

I’m not criticizing you or others, yet I don’t consider you to be solely a critical thinker, nor are my beliefs based solely on faith without evidence. Evidence abounds which supports reasonable faith in a Creator and the biblical text; the universe, creation, historical, archaeological, and prophetic.

It really does not. There are only claims of evidence. When someone believers try to supply evidence it usually becomes clear that they do not either understand evidence or their sources. But you could try. Give an example of evidence for your beliefs and we can discus it.

“… reason and evidence may legitimately point the direction for faith to go—and must do so. Indeed, faith must not violate evidence and reason or it would be irrational. Faith takes a step beyond reason but only in the direction that reason and evidence have pointed.

The idea of a “leap of faith” (that faith must be irrational) has been promoted by some schools of philosophy and religion. If that were true, however, there would be no basis other than feelings or intuition for what one believes. As a consequence, one could believe or have faith in any-thing.”

If that were true "faith" would not be needed. Again, claims of evidence are not evidence.

“One must have some evidence even to believe there is a God. Otherwise, how could the idea of God be sustained?

Thankfully, the evidence is all around us: “The heavens declare the glory of God. . . . For the invisible things of him [God] from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead, so that they [all mankind] are without excuse” (Psalm:19:1; Romans:1:20). One cannot learn very much of the incredible nature of the universe, from the beautiful simplicity of the atomic structure of the elements to the incomprehensible complexity of a living cell with ten thousand chemical reactions going on at once in perfect balance with one another, without realizing that it couldn’t have happened by chance.”

In Defense of the Faith

Our monthly feature excerpted from Dave Hunt's book of the same title. What Role Do Evidence and Reason Play? Question: I can see that it makes no sense and would be very dang

www.thebereancall.org

And one last time. Bring some evidence. For example what is the evidence for a "creator"? You may be required to define your terms as well as defending your claims of evidence.

 

[InChrist]

No, it does not. You are making the irrational assumption that God is moral when the Bible tells us quite clearly that he is not if one takes the book at all literally.

Nor did you refute anything. You first need a rational and consistent definition of morality to even begin to make such a statement.

Of course, God and His word is moral. He’s the Creator and One who defines morality. The Bible is a historical narrative on human sinfulness, immorality, lawlessness or right actions and moral behaviors when in obedience to God.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Of course, God and His word is moral. He’s the Creator and One who defines morality. The Bible is a historical narrative on human sinfulness, immorality, lawlessness or right actions and moral behaviors when in obedience to God.

No, you do not get to make that assumption. Might does not make right. If you want to claim that God is moral the burden of proof is upon you.

And the Bible is far from historical. You do not believe the Flood myth do you? You cant tell me that you really believe that God is a liar to the point that even a middle school student could see that.

 

[InChrist]

It really does not. There are only claims of evidence. When someone believers try to supply evidence it usually becomes clear that they do not either understand evidence or their sources. But you could try. Give an example of evidence for your beliefs and we can discus it.


If that were true "faith" would not be needed. Again, claims of evidence are not evidence.

And one last time. Bring some evidence. For example what is the evidence for a "creator"? You may be required to define your terms as well as defending your claims of evidence.

Obviously, neither you or I can or do know everything there is to know about every inch of this earth and life on it, much less the whole universe. But with what we do know, so far, I believe God is real because…

1. The intricacy and complexity of a single living cell which shows it could not have arisen from non-living matter by chance, but points to an intelligent Creator.

2. The technological intelligence of modern humans beings over a billion other species point to an intelligent Creator and show we couldn’t have evolved by chance.

3. The earth and universe appears to be fine tuned and purposely designed for life.

4. The New Testament has one coherent theme concerning Jesus Christ, though written over 50 years, by at least nine authors who wrote 27 books, without a common editor. This points to inspiration by an intelligent God orchestrating the text and message.

I believe these are just a few arguments which point to the reality of a Creator God, with empirical evidence that is falsifiable and which can be tested by attempting replication. Yet, the more we know concerning these four points the more unlikely it appears that the above could have happened by chance, without an intelligent Creator.

 

[CG Didymus]

The Bible is a historical narrative

A young Earth and Universe, a talking serpent, the flood and the parting of seas, Moses' cane turning into a snake, dead people coming out of their graves, Jesus ascending into the clouds etc. Believe it if you want, but why expect non-Christians to believe those things?

And the Bible is far from historical.

Yes, and we all know that certain Christians are taught to believe that it is. And that's the problem they can't believe otherwise without losing faith in the whole evangelical/fundy Christian beliefs.

Oh, I wonder if he handles rattlesnakes? If not why not? Why not believe all of the "Word" of God? Because, no matter how much a Christian says they "believe", some things in the Bible and NT are just too much to believe. So, they use their brains and rationalize some of those things away. Why not with Eden and Creation? Why not take them as myth? Why does it have to be "historical" fact? But we all know why... They have to believe it all, or none of it makes sense.

 

[InChrist]

A young Earth and Universe, a talking serpent, the flood and the parting of seas, Moses' cane turning into a snake, dead people coming out of their graves, Jesus ascending into the clouds etc. Believe it if you want, but why expect non-Christians to believe those things?

Yes, and we all know that certain Christians are taught to believe that it is. And that's the problem they can't believe otherwise without losing faith in the whole evangelical/fundy Christian beliefs.

Oh, I wonder if he handles rattlesnakes? If not why not? Why not believe all of the "Word" of God? Because, no matter how much a Christian says they "believe", some things in the Bible and NT are just too much to believe. So, they use their brains and rationalize some of those things away. Why not with Eden and Creation? Why not take them as myth? Why does it have to be "historical" fact? But we all know why... They have to believe it all, or none of it makes sense.

I really don’t expect non-Christians to believe the biblical accounts. I didn’t until I got to the point of realizing I needed a Savior. Once born again to new life in Christ my understanding of the scriptures and all of life changed. As the old hymn says,
“I was blind, but now I see”.
I guess what’s discouraging is that non-believers won’t even admit to the obvious, basic truth revealed in the scriptures, that all are sinners in need of a Savior. Rather than sincerely dealing with that, endless time is spent in diverting arguments or excuses to deny God.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

I really don’t expect non-Christians to believe the biblical accounts. I didn’t until I got to the point of realizing I needed a Savior. Once born again to new life in Christ my understanding of the scriptures and all of life changed. As the old hymn says,
“I was blind, but now I see”.
I guess what’s discouraging is that non-believers won’t even admit to the obvious, basic truth revealed in the scriptures, that all are sinners in need of a Savior. Rather than sincerely dealing with that, endless time is spent in diverting arguments or excuses to deny God.

Of course, what you stated are your personal religious beliefs, which are obviously not shared by everyone. If you want to believe that you need a savior, that's fine, but to say that nonbelievers also need Jesus as a savior or to assert any other of your beliefs as definitive facts could be considered preaching and proselytizing, which is against Rule 8. As stated in another thread, say whatever you want; just understand that you must present religious views as your own, not the one and only truth (even if you think they are). I don't care what you believe as long as you don't try to impose your beliefs on me.

 

[lukethethird]

I really don’t expect non-Christians to believe the biblical accounts. I didn’t until I got to the point of realizing I needed a Savior. Once born again to new life in Christ my understanding of the scriptures and all of life changed. As the old hymn says,
“I was blind, but now I see”.
I guess what’s discouraging is that non-believers won’t even admit to the obvious, basic truth revealed in the scriptures, that all are sinners in need of a Savior. Rather than sincerely dealing with that, endless time is spent in diverting arguments or excuses to deny God.

Not everyone needs saving, I haven't done anything requiring someone else to die for me, and if I did I would have to take responsibility for that myself without a scapegoat.