Why just faith is not enough
This is in many ways just a summary of recent thoughts which are posited in recent posts.
If there is a God and a single correct religion then why…?
- Is there sin? God is all-knowing right?
- Is there suffering? God is all-forgiving right?
- Are there multiple religions? God is all-forgiving right?
- Did God change his message (Judaism->Christianity)? God is all-forgiving right?
- Did God recede from the universe? God isn’t shy right?
- Are there a billion galaxies with a billion stars each? God isn’t limited by Physics right and this is a special place right?
- Are there probably more universes than we can even conceive of? God created Quantum Physics for a reason right?
And how?
- Do you explain what happens to those with no religious experience, or the children? God loves them too right even though the church doesn’t?
- Does Joseph’s descendency from the house of David have anything to do with anything? And why do the Gospels disgaree on it anyway? God’s word is infallible right?
- Do you explain the fact that religion has caused more persecution and death than any other single cause in human history? God is always righteous right?
Short post to sum up a night of intenisive thought. I hope tomorrow I can find enough time to write part two of my Quantum Mechanics thread which is long overdue but which is of great importance to me becuase it will, in time, lead to a debate about really fundamental things like free will and multiverses, inflationary theory and quantum computing, the Standard Model, the Higgs Boson, CERN, the LHC, String Theory, the Theory of Everything and… well pretty much from there the entire future of science and humanity in one way or another. It just takes a lot longer to write about things I know and want to be certain about writing correctly than it does to write about things I simply feel to be correct.
Which reminds me. If you want to hear from someone who talks about the same kinds of things as I do but is very strict in his research and quotes and links to everyone and everywhere please read Jumile’s Blog, Hurtling Through Space. He’s a personal friend and he’s very good at writing properly whereas I tend to write or even rant about what I feel. I came to my critical thinking position through thinking critically and I do not believe I need to qualify myself by quoting numerous others. I will do so where I think it is important but in general I will simply ’say what I see’.
Wishing you all a good night.
Critical Thinking, Religion | PadainFain July 9, 2009
7 Comments to “Why just faith is not enough”
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
By Vanessa, July 10, 2009 @ 10:05 am
Do you mind if I tackle your multitude of questions? Might take a while before I get back to you, but I will happily take up the challenge.
Vanessa
By PadainFain, July 10, 2009 @ 10:20 am
I don’t mind at all!
By Vanessa, July 29, 2009 @ 3:28 pm
I’m pretty sure you’ll have me committed to the Christian lunatic ward for this post. But I did try and answer All you questions thouroughly and hope that I have done so adequately.
This is in many ways just a summary of recent thoughts which are posited in recent posts.
If there is a God and a single correct religion then why…?
Is there sin? God is all-knowing right?
From the moment Eve ate the forbidden fruit of the garden sin has been acknowledged to mankind. Genesis 22 And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. They did not follow God’s will (not to eat the fruit) and acted on their own ‘free will’. The Knowledge of good and evil has not left us but has had a great consequence. Free will was given to us but ultimately it is our choice to follow our own (free) will to freely choose the will of God or freely reject it. Romans 12:2 Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.
Obeying God’s law is good to him, however disobeying is considered a sin. 1 John 3:8 The one who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work.
So why you ask is there sin? Because the devil has been sinning from the beginning.
Yes God is all-knowing. He knows what we do where are and what we are thinking. He knows when we do good and when we do bad.
Is there suffering? God is all-forgiving right?
Yes, there is a lot of suffering on earth, but promise of eternal life with God without suffering in Heaven. Suffering is part of the human condition of life on earth. Even God’s only son was made to suffer on the cross.
You ask if God is all-forgiving.
Ephesians 1:6-8
6 to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. 7In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace 8 that he lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding.
All God asks you to do is acknowledge him, his Son and the Holy Spirit.
How can you forgive someone who does not acknowledge their sin?
Are there multiple religions? God is all-forgiving right?
There are multiple religions but the largest are: Christianity, Judaism, Catholicism, Islam and Hinduism. Judaism is the Old Testament of the Bible, but also includes the books of Mishna. The Old Testament establishes the first relationships between God and Man and Man being God’s creation up to the prophecy of Christ who would be born of a virgin in the town of Bethlehem. Throughout the Old Testament other religious cults are mentioned. Baal of Peor was supposedly a God and had a goddess called Asherah. Shortly after Gideon’s unmasking of their false God, after his death they created a new one naming him Baal-Berith. And then there were the Ashtoreths, and the gods of Aram, the gods of Sidon, the gods of Moab, the gods of the Ammonites and the gods of the Philistines. Not forgetting Baal-Zebub, the God of Ekron and Baal, whose idols were shaped like calves and sacrifices were Bulls, they worshipped the sun and moon and the constellations of the stars. The sacrificing or Bulls and the worshipping of cows is as we know an essential part of Hinduism in ancient India. By far the most gory practice of Baal worshippers was the sacrifice of human flesh (children), something that adopted by the druids and the Carthaginian, a practice so horrid that the Romans had difficulty stomaching it in a time the Empire accepted and adopted freely any Gods or occults form around the Empire. Then there were the golden calves at Bethel and Dan that were worshipped to, which again hints at Hinduism. Throughout the Old Testament the Israelites were punished every time they disobeyed God by worshipping other Gods and making idols. In accordance to the Old Testament the prophecy of God’s son was fulfilled in the birth of Jesus Christ. Christianity is based on primarily on the word of God that was proclaimed through his Son. Christianity however, does not ignore the Old Testament.
Catholicism was established by the Romans and enforced ideologies that differ from the teaching of the Bible, which is why I have not included them under Christianity which follows only the word of God and not those of men who proclaim to be as high as God (for in the Bible it clearly states there is only 1 Holy Father and that is not the Pope!).
Islam established itself approximately 600 AD and is almost a rewrite of the Torah with the exception that Muslims not only believed that Jesus existed they also acknowledge he was a prophet of God. The difference between Judaism and Christianity is that Christians believe that the prophecy of God’s Son has been made and the difference between Christianity and Islam is that Christians acknowledge Jesus as the Son of God whereas Islam does not.
Hinduism may be a very old Religion but it, providing it’s variations, does not out-date the word of God.
Did God change his message (Judaism->Christianity)? God is all-forgiving right?
Change what message?
Did God recede from the universe? God isn’t shy right?
No God isn’t shy. James 4:8 Come near to God and he will come near to you.
Are there a billion galaxies with a billion stars each? God isn’t limited by Physics right and this is a special place right?
Are there probably more universes than we can even conceive of? God created Quantum Physics for a reason right?
Why would God be limited by Physics or Quantum Physics? He is the creator of everything.
And how?
Do you explain what happens to those with no religious experience, or the children? God loves them too right even though the church doesn’t?
Why does the church not love children?
Mark 10:14 “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.”
God’s Bible says children are not fully capable of distinguishing between good and evil (Deu 1.39, Isa 7.16).
Numbers 14.29 and Deuteronomy 1.39 establish the precedent that God will NOT hold children responsible when He brings judgment for sin.
What is a “child?” By inference from Numbers 14.29, a “child” is a person who is aged 19 or younger.
CONCLUSION: Only those persons age 20 and older are held accountable for sin.
What happens to those with no religious experience? I can’t think of a singular group of people regardless of their remote settings that has no experience of religion. The word of God has been known since the beginning and is evident in the hearts and minds of even the smallest child regardless of their culture. Findings by Dr. Olivera Petrovich conclude that children naturally acknowledge a designer/creator of natural things regardless to whether they are exposed to religious faith. Matthew 13:19 When anyone hears the message about the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. Not surprising does the Bible say this to be true ‘for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.’ It continuously reminds us that to enter the kingdom of God one must be like a child, innocent and pure.
1 John 3:2 Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when he appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.
As I have already mentioned above, there were many religions around before Christ. Groups that grew and migrated and some that perished. According to the Bible the word of God was proclaimed to all
Does Joseph’s descendency from the house of David have anything to do with anything? And why do the Gospels disgaree on it anyway? God’s word is infallible right?
The difference in nearly all the names in Luke’s genealogy of Jesus as compared with Matthew’s is quickly resolved in the fact that Luke traced the line through David’s son Nathan, instead of Solomon as did Matthew. (Lu 3:31; Mt 1:6, 7) Luke evidently follows the ancestry of Mary, thus showing Jesus’ natural descent from David, while Matthew shows Jesus’ legal right to the throne of David by descent from Solomon through Joseph, who was legally Jesus’ father.
Both Matthew and Luke signify that Joseph was not Jesus’ actual father but only his adoptive father, giving him legal right. Since Jesus was not the natural son of Joseph but was the Son of God, Luke’s genealogy of Jesus would prove that he was, by human birth, a son of David through his natural mother Mary
Do you explain the fact that religion has caused more persecution and death than any other single cause in human history? God is always righteous right?
I’d like to rephrase that to Men has caused more persecution ….in human history.
Christianity is about following God’s word, not the word of Man.
Always remember: Matthew 43″You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbour[a] and hate your enemy.’ 44But I tell you: Love your enemies[b] and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven.”
Answers to other questions you posed:
Marriage at the Resurrection
18Then the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. 19″Teacher,” they said, “Moses wrote for us that if a man’s brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and have children for his brother. 20Now there were seven brothers. The first one married and died without leaving any children. 21The second one married the widow, but he also died, leaving no child. It was the same with the third. 22In fact, none of the seven left any children. Last of all, the woman died too. 23At the resurrection[c] whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her?”
24Jesus replied, “Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God? 25When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. 26Now about the dead rising—have you not read in the book of Moses, in the account of the bush, how God said to him, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’[d]? 27He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken!”
Sorry that it takes up a lot of space, but you did ask an awful lot of interesting and though provoking questions.
Vanessa.
By PadainFain, August 12, 2009 @ 7:21 pm
Vanessa,
Trying to address each of your points from my perspective…
By definition Omniescence means ALL knowing. Therefore a god would know what we are going to do before we do it. By definition this god would know that Eve would eat the fruit. By defintion there cannot be free will if god is omniescent. If we sin it is because he designed us to sin and created the universe in just such a precise way that everything that ever has happened or ever will happen was pre-determined according to his will.
From this we can only conclude one thing… this god loves to be cruel. Every sin we see is of god’s design. The flood, the murder on passover, Vietnam, nuclear bombs… he designed them all and chose to have them happen. You cannot blame the devil or free-will for these things because god knows everything.
“Suffering is part of the human condition of life on earth. Even God’s only son was made to suffer on the cross.”
Yeah that makes a lot of sense. God made a copy of himself, then had himself killed, so he could forgive us for doing the very things he created us to do.
You claim that Christianity is not Catholicism yet it absolutely 100% is. It was the Catholic church that decided that ’sin-based’ Christianity was the one to follow. The other forms of christianity were outlawed. It was the Catholic church which decided which books would form the Canon. Do you read Peter’s Gospel or Thomas’ infant gospel? No you don’t because the Catholic church said you should not.
God did change his message. The old testament is all about ‘an eye for an eye’ while the new testament is ‘turn the other cheek’. He changed the rules. Why? He must be imperfect if he needed to do that. Either that or the entire new testament is made up – as I would assure you all religions are – by primitive people trying to understand the universe around them and forming an ethical framework. That framework merely reflects evolutionary drivers that we call utilitarianism and humanism. Then science comes along and starts filling in the gaps in knowledge. Religion retreats and retreats from more and more areas until there is nothing left. Religion dies.
God most definitely is shy. He started out very active. Burning bushes, floods, murder and genocide. Then he sent an agent in his place for a few years and he’s never been heard from since. Do you REALLY think that if God wanted us all to be Christians he couldn’t just paint the entire sky with “HEY YOU LOT, FOLLOW THESE RULES!” Then we’d know he existed and we’d have no excuse for having different religions or no religion. We would not even need faith because there would be provable evidence of his existence. He doesn’t do this for one simple reason. He does not exist. The utter bullshit of ‘we’re meant to suffer’, ‘we have all the information we need to make the right choice’ and so on just doesn’t cut it with ANY freethinking mind. It is quite clear to rational people that if there was a god and a true religion then it would be self-evident!
I’m afraid I have to utterly disagree with your opinion on those who do not follow christianity for the reasons I just gave. There is absolutely nothing to suggest that it is the correct religion, even to those who want to believe in a creator. So you cannot condemn those who do not follow it – as your god most certainly would.
“The difference in nearly all the names in Luke’s genealogy of Jesus as compared with Matthew’s is quickly resolved in the fact that Luke traced the line through David’s son Nathan, instead of Solomon as did Matthew. (Lu 3:31; Mt 1:6, 7) Luke evidently follows the ancestry of Mary, thus showing Jesus’ natural descent from David, while Matthew shows Jesus’ legal right to the throne of David by descent from Solomon through Joseph, who was legally Jesus’ father.”
You merely prove my point… the Gospels disagree right from the very first verses. They are at the very least flawed. You can therefore not trust ANY part of them.
On Marriage at the Resurrection your quotes are interesting but differ greatly from what is taught – especially to children. Lies and deceit of this nature are inherent in all religious indoctrination.
You also claim that the belief in a creator is inherent in children. Linking this to a knowledge of god is absolutely abhorrent to me. This is precisely the primitive thinking that gave rise to religion in the first place. Children do not have the knowledge to think about cosmology, quantum mechanics, n-dimensional space times of M-Theory and so on. The mind always finds the answer that makes the most sense in the context of available knowledge. As the knowledge improves so does the hypothesis. The earth goes around the sun, the stars are stars, not a fixed backdrop of tiny objects, creatures evolve, Newtonian mechanics is an approximation to General Relativity etc etc. All improvements on previous hypotheses. Eventually we will be able to describe the entire nature of the universe in such a complete way that there will be no room left for theist pursuits. I hope it’s in my lifetime.
By Vanessa, August 17, 2009 @ 10:51 am
By definition Omniescence means ALL knowing. Therefore a god would know what we are going to do before we do it. By definition this god would know that Eve would eat the fruit. By defintion there cannot be free will if god is omniescent.
Perhaps this way of looking at Free-will might help?
Q1. God knows every decision that I am going to make tomorrow.
A1. Correct.
Q2. For sake of simplicity, let’s assume that I am going to make only one decision tomorrow. My decision will be whether or not to go to my aerobics class at the gym.
A2. A decision is a choice about something that you want to do or believe. It is drawing a conclusion while considering the options. Your statement that you are going to make the decision means that you admit that you are the one making the choice. By definition then, you are freely choosing to do something. Therefore, to later say that you have no choice in what you are doing is a contradiction of your statement here.
Q3. God knows what decision I will make. He has it written on his “list.”
A3.
a. There is no “list” that God has anywhere of the things that anyone is going to do. The knowledge of God is not a list. It is simply necessarily complete since He knows all things. This is because God’s nature requires that He know all things since He is everywhere all the time: the past, present, and future.
Q4. His “list” can’t be wrong.
A4. This is not an issue of the list being wrong. It is simply a fact that God knows all things. Whatever you choose to do is what God knows will happen. If you chose not to go to the class, then that is what God would have known would be your choice. So, whichever choice you freely make is the one God knows you will make.
Furthermore, the “list” will always be right. That is, it is always right because it is a list of the free will choices you want to make. Read below…
Q5. If his “list” says I am going to my aerobics class, I must go.
A5.
a. The problem here is that the idea of a list introduces the error that there is a set list of things that the person must accomplish, because it is on a list for them to do. This is not the case. You do not go to the gym because it is on the list that you must fulfil. It is simply an advance recording of what you will do based on the choices you will freely make.
b. A better understanding of the “list” idea would be if God wrote a list of the things you did after you did them. He can do this since He is in the future and can look back from the future to see what you chose to do at any time. Time is relative to God. Because you have already done them freely (from God’s future perspective looking backward), the list can be made accurately by God. Since He is also in the past and present, He can even show us this list in advance…only for Him it happened a long time ago as He watched you freely do what you wanted to do. So, since God is in all places at all time, He can look back in time to get the list, and then even reveal it in advance to you. It would be a list of things you freely chose to do — or should I say, that you will freely choose to do.
Q5. The fact that “I must go” is incompatible with the statement that I am free to decide whether to go or not to go.
a. There is no “must” in this situation. You will freely choose.
b. There is no incompatibility at all if we see that God simply knows what our choices are going to be before we make them since it is necessarily true that He knows all things.
c. Furthermore, this idea of God’s knowledge and peoples’ freedom is ultimately an unanswerable issue since it involves us working in time and God is outside of time. Our question deals with a situation from a perspective inside of time where God is outside of time. By default, our questions and answers concerning this issue cannot be complete. Past, present, and future are concepts and realities created for us, not for God.
From this we can only conclude one thing… this god loves to be cruel.
Really?
Every sin we see is of god’s design. The flood, the murder on passover, Vietnam, nuclear bombs… he designed them all and chose to have them happen. You cannot blame the devil or free-will for these things because god knows everything.
God certainly does know our future and the end of days is prophesied throughout the Old and New Testament.. It is prophesied not only that war, famine, godlessness and disease is attributed to end of days, but that the devil had plans of contributing evil into the world until his time ends which is also prophesied. So yes, God knows, but to blame God for the devils handywork is unjustified.
“Suffering is part of the human condition of life on earth. Even God’s only son was made to suffer on the cross.”
Yeah that makes a lot of sense. God made a copy of himself, then had himself killed, so he could forgive us for doing the very things he created us to do.
Although your argument seems to conclude the people suffer ‘because’ of God rather than admit that without the belief of God people still suffer. God did not sanction sin but made a promise of forgiveness to all that ask. His son did not die in vain.
You claim that Christianity is not Catholicism yet it absolutely 100% is. It was the Catholic church that decided that ’sin-based’ Christianity was the one to follow.
Sin-based Christianity??? There is nothing about Catholicism (when observed from the time of Constantine towards today) that testifies to the word of God. Keeping the word of God (the Bible) from its congregation and inventing dogma that outside of God word (the Bible) is one of the most heinous crimes the Catholic Church has committed.
Christianity and Catholicism differ so widely in view that they are in no way comparable. True Christianity (The Bible) has absolutely 100% nothing to do with Catholicism and vice versa.
The standard collection of the New Testament Scripture was formed in the 1st century by the oversight of the Apostles. For more information visit this webiste: http://godsbreath.wordpress.com/2007/05/03/new-testament-collection/
God did change his message. The old testament is all about ‘an eye for an eye’ while the new testament is ‘turn the other cheek’. He changed the rules. Why?
The answer is similar to the question Antony posed on Jumile’s webiste.
http://hurtlingthroughspace.com/?p=489#comments
The difference is that when Jesus’ grace comes into the world, the covenant with God is changed.
Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned— 13for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. 14Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.
He must be imperfect if he needed to do that. Either that or the entire new testament is made up – as I would assure you all religions are – by primitive people trying to understand the universe around them and forming an ethical framework. That framework merely reflects evolutionary drivers that we call utilitarianism and humanism. Then science comes along and starts filling in the gaps in knowledge. Religion retreats and retreats from more and more areas until there is nothing left. Religion dies.
The evidence for God lies in his Word. The prophecy of mankind and the truth of what lies to come.
God most definitely is shy. He started out very active. Burning bushes, floods, murder and genocide. Then he sent an agent in his place for a few years and he’s never been heard from since. Do you REALLY think that if God wanted us all to be Christians he couldn’t just paint the entire sky with “HEY YOU LOT, FOLLOW THESE RULES!” Then we’d know he existed and we’d have no excuse for having different religions or no religion. We would not even need faith because there would be provable evidence of his existence. He doesn’t do this for one simple reason. He does not exist.
People testify to God daily, people are healed or saved all the time. Perhaps you are not looking in the right places. Try opening a Bible or visit your local Church and you will be amazed at the testimony of God lives.
The utter bullshit of ‘we’re meant to suffer’, ‘we have all the information we need to make the right choice’ and so on just doesn’t cut it with ANY freethinking mind.
What ‘right choice’ do we have to make when suffering? Not all suffering leads to death.
It is quite clear to rational people that if there was a god and a true religion then it would be self-evident!
And yet you still refuse to see it.
You merely prove my point… the Gospels disagree right from the very first verses. They are at the very least flawed. You can therefore not trust ANY part of them.
There is nothing flawed in my findings. One genealogy of Jesus is from his fathers line and the other from his mothers.
On Marriage at the Resurrection your quotes are interesting but differ greatly from what is taught – especially to children.
Such a pity as my ‘quotes’ are taken directly from the Bible and should have been taught to all.
Lies and deceit of this nature are inherent in all religious indoctrination.
You also claim that the belief in a creator is inherent in children. Linking this to a knowledge of god is absolutely abhorrent to me.
Scientific research has come to this conclusion as I previously mentioned and provided you the source.
This is precisely the primitive thinking that gave rise to religion in the first place. Children do not have the knowledge to think about cosmology, quantum mechanics, n-dimensional space times of M-Theory and so on. The mind always finds the answer that makes the most sense in the context of available knowledge.
Most of the children asked had no knowledge of God, yet believed that He made them. The findings disturbed some scientists (Dr. R. Dawkins in particular) that to counter it they have since introduced a theory of a God gene, brought about by evolution. The notion of a gene that makes a person believe in God was recently parodied by fellow atheist John Cleese in this funny sketch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-M-vnmejwXo
As the knowledge improves so does the hypothesis. The earth goes around the sun, the stars are stars, not a fixed backdrop of tiny objects, creatures evolve, Newtonian mechanics is an approximation to General Relativity etc etc. All improvements on previous hypotheses. Eventually we will be able to describe the entire nature of the universe in such a complete way that there will be no room left for theist pursuits. I hope it’s in my lifetime.
And yet Religion remains. The only way of stamping it out is through genocide. Are you prepared to kill those closest to you just to prove you are right???
By PadainFain, August 17, 2009 @ 11:10 am
I’m afraid you still completely miss the point. If God knows what you are going to do then you have no free will. If you did then God could not know. Then he would not be omniscient.
And also you still cannot get over this Catholicism vs Christianity thing. Christianity as you know it IS Catholicism. They decided long ago which scripture you could and could not read. You cannot separate the two unless you can restore the other forms of Christianity and their dozens of other scriptures that you are denied access to.
Finally there is no evidence of a God gene. Most scientists would refute it. However evolutionary biologists can show that a God meme can be beneficial to the survival of a primitive species. By unbending obedience to unprovable rules a species can be protected from making fundamental errors (e.g. don’t drink that water (because it’s poisoned)). Science removes this requirement. One might still be able to debate that the meme is useful in that individuals can benefit from being part of a larger group but the need for that group to be religious is zero. One can gain the same benefits from any social grouping. Perhaps there are other benefits? Perhaps some people simply cannot comprehend a universe that does not require a god? Certainly levels of mental illness in religious groupings is higher than in non-religious ones (as are the rates of murder by them). Perhaps the benefit to the species is to draw these less-well-equipped people together and prevent them breeding with the rest of the less-instable population?
And one final factual point. You are completely wrong about the lineage of Jesus claimed by the two gospels. BOTH explicitly trace his lineage through his father. One is not through his mother:
Luke 3:23 “And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,”
Matthew 1:16 “And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.”
So the bible is flawed. You can claim all you like that the word of god is infallible, but clearly if there ever was such a thing, it was written down all wrong. And if one passage can be shown to be wrong then doubt has to be cast on the entire content.
By Vanessa, August 31, 2009 @ 7:54 am
I’m afraid you still completely miss the point. If God knows what you are going to do then you have no free will. If you did then God could not know. Then he would not be omniscient.
Surely you know your own choices before you make them. Your thought process determines what you want to do and which actions to undertake. If God knows your thoughts he can know what choice you will make without interferring with your free will.
And also you still cannot get over this Catholicism vs Christianity thing. Christianity as you know it IS Catholicism. They decided long ago which scripture you could and could not read. You cannot separate the two unless you can restore the other forms of Christianity and their dozens of other scriptures that you are denied access to.
Catholicism as we know it today was not established until after 325 AD by Constantine. Prior to that the Church was commonly referred to as the Catholic Church, Catholic meaning ‘Universal’. The majority of the books of the New Testament (in particularly the epistles of Paul) were being copied and circulated throughout the early churches. One such copy, believed dated 170 AD is the Murotorian fragment which included the four gospels, Acts of the Apostles and Paul’s epistles (but not the anonymous Epistle to the Hebrews, 1 and 2 Peter, or James). It also includes the books of John and Jude.
The perversion of the ‘Catholic’ faith only occurred after it’s inclusion as a state religion by Constantine. After that Catholicism has ceased to be a religion based on the foundations of Gods word and rather that of their own makings.
Finally there is no evidence of a God gene. Most scientists would refute it.
I’m glad you agree.
Certainly levels of mental illness in religious groupings is higher than in non-religious ones (as are the rates of murder by them).
If you are going to make such a claim, perhaps you might be willing to quote a source.
Perhaps the benefit to the species is to draw these less-well-equipped people together and prevent them breeding with the rest of the less-instable population?
Less-well-equipped??? Many Christians I know hold
Phd’s and degrees (even in Science!!).
And one final factual point. You are completely wrong about the lineage of Jesus claimed by the two gospels. BOTH explicitly trace his lineage through his father. One is not through his mother:
Luke 3:23 “And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,”
Matthew 1:16 “And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.”
See here for family tree: http://ldolphin.org/2adams.html
I don’t agree that the passage is wrong and considering your statement perhaps you’d like to explain Dawkins credibility when miss-quoting John Adams:
Dawkins goes on to quote several founding fathers, including Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin, who made statement against the religion of their time. John Adams is quoted as saying, “This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it.” However here is the complete quote in an April 19, 1817, letter to Thomas Jefferson:
“Twenty times in the course of my late reading have I been on the point of breaking out, ‘This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion at all!!!’ But in this exclamation I would have been as fanatical as Bryant or Cleverly. Without religion, this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in polite company, I mean hell.”5
In quoting John Adams out-of-context, Dawkins has made it seem that Adams said exactly opposite of what he really intended…….. Adams directly refuted Dawkins’ major premise of the book – that religion is the great evil in the world – and affirmed the opposite -….. In fact, John Adams said some things about Christianity that Dawkins probably won’t be quoting any time soon such as, “The Christian religion, in its primitive purity and simplicity, I have entertained for more than sixty years. It is the religion of reason, equity, and love; it is the religion of the head and the heart.”6
‘And if one passage can be shown to be wrong then doubt has to be cast on the entire content.’