Homosexuality v. Christianity -- A FEW QUESTIONS:

maliagar wrote:

I want to stick to a point-by-point reading of the Genesis story, while you want to introduce personal assumptions about God to make the Adam & Eve story parallel to King Kong, and to prove your point . In other words, you want to introduce your assumptions about the possibility of God making mistakes, to prove that God made a mistake! (a circular argument).

Very well. I will follow Frank's excellent advice: I hereby concede the King Kong example. I state that there is no parallel between it and the story of Adam & Eve and the tree. I solemnly foreswear, abjure, and renounce my previous position. The King Kong debate is now concluded. So let it be said, so let it be done!

Now, Maliagar, I have only one question left for you: can God ever make a mistake?

0 Replies

chicagojoe, Hell will freeze over before you'll get maliagar to answer your question.

0 Replies

joefromchicago wrote:

I will follow Frank's excellent advice:...

Frankie has nothing to do with your insistence on a poor example. My own advice was:

maliagar wrote:

OTHER BIBLE STORIES MIGHT BE MORE USEFUL FOR YOUR OWN PURPOSES (DISCUSSING GOD'S SEEMING "MISTAKES"). YOU WOULD HAVE TO SELECT MORE CAREFULLY THE STORY YOU WANT TO USE AS AN EXAMPLE... HOWEVER, A KEY METHODOLOGICAL RULE WOULD BE: STICK TO WHAT THE STORY ACTUALLY SAYS, AND DO NOT ASSUME WHAT YOU'RE SEEKING TO PROVE (CIRCULARITY).

We could go directly to those stories, but let's do things step by step.

joefromchicago wrote:

I hereby concede the King Kong example. I state that there is no parallel between it and the story of Adam & Eve and the tree. I solemnly foreswear, abjure, and renounce my previous position. The King Kong debate is now concluded. So let it be said, so let it be done!

Is it that hard to admit a mistake that you have to surround it with defensive sarcasm? Rolling Eyes

Quote:

Now, Maliagar, I have only one question left for you: can God ever make a mistake?

Theologically, God can never make a mistake.

Now, certain Old Testament stories present an anthropomorphic picture/understanding of God. Hence, some of them can be construed as implying mistakes of one sort of another by this anthropomorphic God (not Genesis 1-3, though).

You see? If you had asked the right question from the beginning, things would have been so much easier...

:wink:

0 Replies

maliagar wrote:

OTHER BIBLE STORIES MIGHT BE MORE USEFUL FOR YOUR OWN PURPOSES (DISCUSSING GOD'S SEEMING "MISTAKES"). YOU WOULD HAVE TO SELECT MORE CAREFULLY THE STORY YOU WANT TO USE AS AN EXAMPLE... HOWEVER, A KEY METHODOLOGICAL RULE WOULD BE: STICK TO WHAT THE STORY ACTUALLY SAYS, AND DO NOT ASSUME WHAT YOU'RE SEEKING TO PROVE (CIRCULARITY).

We could go directly to those stories, but let's do things step by step.

Now, certain Old Testament stories present an anthropomorphic picture/understanding of God. Hence, some of them can be construed as implying mistakes of one sort of another by this anthropomorphic God (not Genesis 1-3, though).

Maliagar, you bring this back to an interesting point. Bible stories. What are stories? Merriam Webster gives us these options:

Quote:

Main Entry: 1sto·ry
Pronunciation: 'stOr-E, 'stor-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural stories
Etymology: Middle English storie, from Old French estorie, from Latin historia -- more at HISTORY
Date: 13th century
1 archaic : HISTORY 1, 3
2 a : an account of incidents or events b : a statement regarding the facts pertinent to a situation in question c : ANECDOTE; especially : an amusing one
3 a : a fictional narrative shorter than a novel; specifically : SHORT STORY b : the intrigue or plot of a narrative or dramatic work
4 : a widely circulated rumor
5 : LIE, FALSEHOOD
6 : LEGEND, ROMANCE
7 : a news article or broadcast
8 : MATTER, SITUATION

So, a bible story could be history, a statement re facts, a fictional narrative, a rumour, a lie or falsehood, a legend or romance, or a news article. We weren't there when the bible stories were written. We weren't around when the events talked about in the bible took place. We don't know. We can have beliefs, we can have hopes, but we can't truly have knowledge.

Someone can know what they had for breakfast today, but unless they were there, they don't KNOW what anyone else had for breakfast. The story someone tells me about yesterday's breakfast might be true, I might want it to be true, but I don't know.

Thanks for bringing this all back to its proper perspective.

0 Replies

ehBeth wrote:

So, a bible story could be history, a statement re facts, a fictional narrative, a rumour, a lie or falsehood, a legend or romance, or a news article.

And the only way of deciding would be to study the author's intended message, the intended audience, the literary style, and the larger cultural, religious, and historical framework. And this for the wildly different 72 books that make up the Scriptures (which were written over a 2000-year span). Once we get the human perspective of the author, we can move into studying what's this book's (and the events / messages it conveys') contribution to Revelation.

Quote:

We weren't there when the bible stories were written. We weren't around when the events talked about in the bible took place. We don't know.

The same can be said about any ancient text, or any historical character.

Quote:

We can have beliefs, we can have hopes, but we can't truly have knowledge.

I disagree. This would imply that we cannot know history. Or that we can only know what we directly experience. If we accept that we know things with different degrees of certainty (in part related to the trustworthiness of the historical record), then we can allow for different types of knowledge.

Quote:

Thanks for bringing this all back to its proper perspective.

These issues are not easy. They require study. If anybody expects easy answers, he'll be quickly disappointed (as we've repeatedly seen in this forum). And if he get's impatient and embraces the first quick-fix that comes to his mind, he'll be untrue to the nature of these issues.

:wink:

0 Replies

Nobody said it was easy, mal. But it is simple. Those are very different concepts.

I don't feel any differently about bible stories than I do about any other type of history.

You brought the word story forward. It reminded me of why I don't trust most religions or their stories. I'll give you credit for that.

Quote:

And the only way of deciding would be to study the author's intended message, the intended audience, the literary style, and the larger cultural, religious, and historical framework. And this for the wildly different 72 books that make up the Scriptures (which were written over a 2000-year span). Once we get the human perspective of the author, we can move into studying what's this book's (and the events / messages it conveys') contribution to Revelation.

Since we are unable to determine the intended message or the intended audience without speaking directly to the long-dead authors and committees, we can't even begin to do the things you suggest. I don't believe you can honestly make any judgment as to the truth of any story in the bible. You can hope that you understand what the goals were, you can hope that your belief is supported, you can hope the stories are true or have a basis in truth, but you do not have proof.

I think many of the stories and messages in the bible are laudable. I believe that if you asked most people who knew me IRL, they would tell you that I am a good Christian. However, I don't believe the stories can be proven.

0 Replies

maliagar (Aug. 27) wrote:

Can you tell me of ONE mistake made by God in the Bible?

joefromchicago (Aug. 29) wrote:

Rather than further beat this particular deceased equine, let me ask you one question, maliagar: can God ever make a mistake?

If you answer anything other than "no" to that question, then I'd be willing to continue this pleasant little exercise. If, on the other hand, you answer "no," then I'll have to conclude that your initial query (where you asked "Can you tell me of ONE mistake made by God in the Bible?") was just a case of common trolling. After all, if, by definition, God is infallible, then asking for instances of God's mistakes in the Bible is not a request for information, or evidence, or even for some rational debate. Rather, it's a blatant troll.

maliagar (Aug. 29) wrote:

So, can God make a mistake? What answer would you want? Theological or exegetical?

joefromchicago (Aug. 29) wrote:

Answer in any fashion that you see fit.

maliagar (Sep. 1) wrote:

Theologically, God can never make a mistake.

I hereby submit that Maliagar is a self-confessed troll.

0 Replies

skewering his own arguments, maliagar wrote:

These issues are not easy. They require study. If anybody expects easy answers, he'll be quickly disappointed (as we've repeatedly seen in this forum). And if he get's impatient and embraces the first quick-fix that comes to his mind, he'll be untrue to the nature of these issues.

Wierd. He can say it, and yet not get it. Thats a truly special ability.

0 Replies

Special. That's it. :wink:

0 Replies

Glad you picked up on that, ehBeth ... I had wondered if perhaps the implication might have been a bit indistinct Mr. Green

0 Replies

Good point, Timber.

0 Replies

maliagar wrote:

ehBeth wrote:
So, a bible story could be history, a statement re facts, a fictional narrative, a rumour, a lie or falsehood, a legend or romance, or a news article.

And the only way of deciding would be to study the author's intended message, the intended audience, the literary style, and the larger cultural, religious, and historical framework. And this for the wildly different 72 books that make up the Scriptures (which were written over a 2000-year span). Once we get the human perspective of the author, we can move into studying what's this book's (and the events / messages it conveys') contribution to Revelation.

Isn't it convenient that we can't examine anything about the author because in most cases, we don't know for sure who the author really was? Further, if we examine the Bible from a comparative mythological standpoint, we find that very little of it is actually original to the Hebrews. Interesting that most of their miracles happened to other people centuries before the Jews ever appeared on the landscape, isn't it?

0 Replies

As to Joe's accusation that Maliagar has just been "trolling" -- ain't it the truth!!!

Maliagar asked Joe for an example of even one instance where God -- meaning that pathetic monster described in the Bible -- ever made a mistake.

Joe, I, and several others pointed out mistakes the god of the Bible made.

Now, Maliagar is saying that God cannot make a mistake -- and any "mistakes" that appear in the Bible are either misunderstandings on our part -- or misunderstandings on the part of the people the god designated to write the books of the Bible.

He even suggests that the things we pointed out as mistakes should be viewed in the light of the audience the material was written for - and that doing so would show us that the supposed mistakes are not really mistakes at all.

Jeez, I though all that Bible stuff was written for us.

US!

Isn't that the point?

This monster god wanted US to know what pleased him (not a hell of a lot) and what offended him (damn near everything any human ever does) - so if we view stuff like the story of Adam and Eve (which even Maliagar has to acknowledge effects (or affects) us - why are we supposed to get a different appreciation of what went on in the story.

As I pointed out in my last post - depending upon the god's intentions, he either made a mistake placing the tree where Adam and Eve could get at it - or he made a mistake by not giving them the knowledge necessary to see right from wrong - the difference between obedience and disobedience.

Either way - there WAS a mistake made - and the god made it.

(Maliagar's explanation about the mistake we found in the Bible, by the way, seems to be another mistake made by the god.)

Don't see how Maliagar can get past all this - except by continuing his incessant denial.

Whew - gotta thank Maliagar for one lesson he has taught me - if no one else. I sure am happy I am not superstitious enough to be afraid of any gods - especially the demon Christian god.

Gazooks, if I had to live my life the way Maliagar lives his, I'd sure be a lot less happy.

0 Replies

maliagar wrote:

Theologically, God can never make a mistake.

Of course, that ignores places in the Bible where God specifically made a mistake. Must be nice to be able to simply ignore things that are theologically inconvenient.

0 Replies

To have complete faith in the bible, one must ignore logic, common sense, errors and omissions, mistakes and contradictions, and supplecate one's trust to a book written by many authors over two thousand years. Makes you wonder why so many follow it.

0 Replies

I got the straight dope from a catholic on the creation of the world. This is what I received from my query:
__________________
The Book of Genesis says that God worked at creation for six days and then rested on the seventh day. This does not mean that Catholics must believe that God created the world in 144 hours.
May the Lord bless your continuing faith journey.

Peace and every blessing,

Father Pat

********************************
Father Pat McCloskey, O.F.M.
Editor
St. Anthony Messenger
28 W. Liberty Street
Cincinnati, OH 45210
Ph: 513/241-5615, ext. 116

SAM homepage: www.AmericanCatholic.org

0 Replies

In the condensation and editing of the Bible (much like restorers who worked on the Sistine Chapel ceiling, ending up altering the original work away from the original Michaelangelo intent) the chapter in question with Chrtitianity/Homosexuality, Levicticus almost ended up on the cutting room floor as too bizarre to be included. However, it covers some "historical" links between the two bookend chapters, so it was left in without much editing. My source? None other than correspondence from J.R.R. Tolkien, the author of "The Lord of the Rings" who worked on new versions of the St. James Bible.

0 Replies

I knew Sam and Frodo were gay... Laughing

0 Replies

The entire book as been said to be homoerotic -- I guess some perceived Aragorn and Boromir's comaraderie as a bit too thick?

0 Replies

Well, now I get the idea behind 'The Two Towers' and 'Return of the King', and just what sort of 'ring' was it anyway.... Laughing

0 Replies

Homosexuality v. Christianity -- A FEW QUESTIONS:

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know