Is Science getting closer to God and the Bible?

[schlitt]

Evangelism is an attempt to help other people, I’m happy to agree. But why are Christians helping other people? Because it’s commanded of God. Why follow God’s commandments? Because it makes you a more righteous person. Why strive for righteousness? Because only the righteous get to heaven.

Keep asking “why?” of a Christian, you eventually get to I Me Mine. You may go through a lot of they them theirs, but inevitably you end up on a foundational basement of self-interest. Again, this doesn’t make Christianity wrong, only more or less noble when compared to other religions.

This may be true of many people. However I do not think it would be accurate to state that EVERY Christian is evangelizing for his/her own benefit as purely a selfish way of getting themselves to heaven. If you genuinely thought your friends and family were going to end up in unimaginable pain for eternity I am sure you would want to stop this from happening to them through empathy. Also, surely a few people would have that same empathy for strangers.

I agree when you break it down far enough, that it is a self serving action, but then every action every human makes is anyway. (I realize this comment opens up a whole new can of worms)

 

[Ryan O'Dine]

This may be true of many people. However I do not think it would be accurate to state that EVERY Christian is evangelizing for his/her own benefit as purely a selfish way of getting themselves to heaven.

If a Christian fails to save a loved one’s soul, they may be rewarded for the attempt. If they fail to save their own, they’re doomed. Regardless of the individual, the philosophy itself is me-centered.

I agree when you break it down far enough, that it is a self serving action, but then every action every human makes is anyway. (I realize this comment opens up a whole new can of worms)

Humans are self-serving. Not all religions are.

Jews are sometimes called “the Chosen People” -- chosen to lead the nations through the Messianic era. Paving the way for God -- and making it easier for everyone else -- is the purpose of being a Jew.

Individual Jews may be egotistical, self-centered pigs, or not. The ultimate motivation of Judaism is altruistic.

Even the navel-gazing Zen Buddhist does not have Nirvana as the ultimate goal. It’s just a step toward the goal of eventually helping all sentient beings to a higher level of existence. The ultimate motivation of Zen Buddhism is altruistic.

 

[Ladewig]

It seems that way.

He never responds to direct arguments.
He never admits error.
His arguments are the worst form of popular tripe.
His methods are sloppy, and his conclusions are highly questionable.....

But aren't there a noticeable number of fundamentalist Christians that engage in all those behaviors? I am not convinced he is a troll.

 

[schlitt]

If a Christian fails to save a loved one’s soul, they may be rewarded for the attempt. If they fail to save their own, they’re doomed. Regardless of the individual, the philosophy itself is me-centered.

The end result may be self-serving, but that does not mean the person has used purely selfish reasoning to get there.

Humans are self-serving. Not all religions are.

Jews are sometimes called “the Chosen People” -- chosen to lead the nations through the Messianic era. Paving the way for God -- and making it easier for everyone else -- is the purpose of being a Jew.

Individual Jews may be egotistical, self-centered pigs, or not. The ultimate motivation of Judaism is altruistic.

Even the navel-gazing Zen Buddhist does not have Nirvana as the ultimate goal. It’s just a step toward the goal of eventually helping all sentient beings to a higher level of existence. The ultimate motivation of Zen Buddhism is altruistic.

The only way you can construe Christianity to be completely ego-centric, is if you assert that every Christian is looking to "save" others purely for their own benefit. I would say that is simply not the case. Just because the perceived end result has you being saved also, does not mean it is your only motivation.
Sure some are evangelizing purely to score brownie points, but there would be many who genuinely do not want to see other people suffer an eternity of damnation.

It all depends how far in the chain of events you are willing to travel to, before something ceases to be truly altruistic.

 

[DOC]

It seems that way.

He never responds to direct arguments.
He never admits error.

You must not have read all of my threads or either you must have a very short memory. Here they are. These kinds of false statements hurt your crediblility.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/search.php?searchid=1158752

 

[Hokulele]

You must not have read all of my threads or either you must have a very short memory. Here they are. These kinds of false statements hurt your crediblility.

How about you show us just one example of where you have admitted to an error.

 

[DOC]

And with regard to the whole writing isssue (that was mentioned in a site I brought in).

This website says that the Hebrew alphabet wasn't even created until the 10th century.

History of the alphabet

Middle Bronze Age 19th c. BC

* Ugaritic 15th c. BC
* Proto-Canaanite 14th c. BC
o Phoenician 11th c. BC
+ Paleo-Hebrew 10th c. BC
+ Aramaic 8th c. BC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_alphabet


The bottom line is that the people, who Moses led, were not literate educated people and the story of Genesis was the way God (through Moses) revealed Himself to them. God's revealing of Himself and spiritual truths increased over time and the span of the Bible. We have a big God. That's why it takes a big Book even to reveal just parts of Him. And there is still more to reveal if you believe Christ when He said He would send the Holy Spirit who will teach you all things.

 

[wollery]

You must not have read all of my threads or either you must have a very short memory. Here they are. These kinds of false statements hurt your crediblility.

How about you demonstrate this to be wrong by actually answering the posts in this thread that have addressed your argument?

Pointing out the threads you've started in which you responded to one or two posts does not falsify joobz' statement.

Show us the posts where you have answered direct arguments. Show us the posts where you have admitted to error.

I posted a response to your "Laws of Nature/Laws of Spirituality" post, as did others. You have not responded to any of them. Instead, you choose to pick out something said in a side discussion, which has nothing to do with the main topic, and whine about how you're being persecuted.

Grow up, and respond to those people who address your arguments, because at the moment you're coming off like a 6 year old complaining to teacher about a schoolyard argument - "Miss, Miss, joobz called me a poopie head!"

 

[wollery]

And with regard to the whole writing isssue (that was mentioned in a site I brought in).

This website says that the Hebrew alphabet wasn't even created until the 10th century.

History of the alphabet

Middle Bronze Age 19th c. BC

* Ugaritic 15th c. BC
* Proto-Canaanite 14th c. BC
o Phoenician 11th c. BC
+ Paleo-Hebrew 10th c. BC
+ Aramaic 8th c. BC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_alphabet


The bottom line is that the people, who Moses led, were not literate educated people and the story of Genesis was the way God (through Moses) revealed Himself to them. God's revealing of Himself and spiritual truths increased over time and the span of the Bible. We have a big God. That's why it takes a big Book even to reveal just parts of Him. And there is still more to reveal if you believe Christ when He said He would send the Holy Spirit who will teach you all things.

All of which gets nowhere even close to addressing the fact that you said that written language didn't develop until the 12th century BCE, which is an erroneous statement.

http://www.ancientscripts.com/cuneiform.html

 

[joobz]

You must not have read all of my threads or either you must have a very short memory. Here they are. These kinds of false statements hurt your crediblility.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/search.php?searchid=1158752

Trust me, I am not the one with a credibility issue here.
Prove me wrong, and I'll admit error.

DOC, do you really want me to go through the history of our conversations? I have a clear record of you falsely accusing me of lying while catching you in a direct lie. You attempted to weasle out of admitting fault by playing semantics, but it didn't work.

 

[Foster Zygote]

How about you show us just one example of where you have admitted to an error.

I'll second this request. How 'bout it DOC?

 

[Taffer]

I'd be happy with DOC just answering questions related to the thread.

Maybe he has bad eyesight.

DOC, please stop derailing your own thread and answer some of the many questions asked of you.

 

[H3LL]

....
History of the alphabet

Middle Bronze Age 19th c. BC

* Ugaritic 15th c. BC
* Proto-Canaanite 14th c. BC
o Phoenician 11th c. BC
+ Paleo-Hebrew 10th c. BC
+ Aramaic 8th c. BC....

My bold

....the first written languages being developed around 1200 BC....

It seems you do not read what other people write but at least read your own posts.

Or is this just another example of lying.

Also, just to remind you, Chinese written language dates back 4000 years or more




BTW, didn't your god create the pen first?
When he goes under the pen-name of Allah?
Or so it is written.....

.

 

[Cleon]

And with regard to the whole writing isssue (that was mentioned in a site I brought in).

This website says that the Hebrew alphabet wasn't even created until the 10th century.

DOC, just stop. you are wrong.

Quote-mining wikipedia for something you think might make part of your false statement somewhat true does not make your statement any less incorrect.

All you are doing now is reveling in your own dishonesty.

You had the opportunity to correct the record. Instead, you tried to pretend you never posted what you very clearly did.

 

[Ladewig]

The only way you can construe Christianity to be completely ego-centric, is if you assert that every Christian is looking to "save" others purely for their own benefit. I would say that is simply not the case. Just because the perceived end result has you being saved also, does not mean it is your only motivation.
Sure some are evangelizing purely to score brownie points, but there would be many who genuinely do not want to see other people suffer an eternity of damnation.

It all depends how far in the chain of events you are willing to travel to, before something ceases to be truly altruistic.

Imagine if Jesus returned today and all people of the world clearly recognized Him and were convinced of His authenticity. If He said that no person who ever stepped inside of a fundamentalist church could ever go to heaven no matter what they did from now until their death, but anyone who converted to Christianity from this point onward was eligible for heaven, then how many of the "newly unsaved" would still try to convert people to Christianity? I think that number would be very, very small.

 

[Ryan O'Dine]

The only way you can construe Christianity to be completely ego-centric, is if you assert that every Christian is looking to "save" others purely for their own benefit. I would say that is simply not the case. Just because the perceived end result has you being saved also, does not mean it is your only motivation.
Sure some are evangelizing purely to score brownie points, but there would be many who genuinely do not want to see other people suffer an eternity of damnation.

It all depends how far in the chain of events you are willing to travel to, before something ceases to be truly altruistic.

Imagine if Jesus returned today and all people of the world clearly recognized Him and were convinced of His authenticity. If He said that no person who ever stepped inside of a fundamentalist church could ever go to heaven no matter what they did from now until their death, but anyone who converted to Christianity from this point onward was eligible for heaven, then how many of the "newly unsaved" would still try to convert people to Christianity? I think that number would be very, very small.

Or to put it yet another way...

The obligations of a Christian end once they get their own posterior behinds into heaven.

The obligations of a Jew only end when everyone else gets into heaven (or the Earthly Kingdom to come -- close enough).

The obligations of a Zen Buddhist only end when everyone else reaches Nirvana.

Again, my focus is not on the individual believer’s native altruism. It’s on the altruism the religion requires of the individual believer.

 

[shadron]

And with regard to the whole writing isssue (that was mentioned in a site I brought in).

This website says that the Hebrew alphabet wasn't even created until the 10th century.

History of the alphabet

Middle Bronze Age 19th c. BC

* Ugaritic 15th c. BC
* Proto-Canaanite 14th c. BC
o Phoenician 11th c. BC
+ Paleo-Hebrew 10th c. BC
+ Aramaic 8th c. BC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_alphabet

Equating alphabets with writing is quite the non sequiter. Chinese didn't use any alphabet until the 18th century, even in transliteration; are you stating that they didn't have written communications before then? It is well known that the alphabet flowed from several earlier pictographic writing forms (notable Cuneiform and Heiroglyphics, perhaps others). Read, for example, http://www.historian.net/hxwrite.htm.

 

[DOC]

Your god causes people to be tormented for said reason. Your god could stop this at any time for any reason without losing anything.

I believe this to be a false statement. For example if someone molests a child. If God were to stop this, He would have to take away His greatest gift to humanity- the gift of free will. God will punish sin (and the molester) if we are to believe the bible. But He will never take away Free Will, once it has been given.

 

[schlitt]

Imagine if Jesus returned today and all people of the world clearly recognized Him and were convinced of His authenticity. If He said that no person who ever stepped inside of a fundamentalist church could ever go to heaven no matter what they did from now until their death, but anyone who converted to Christianity from this point onward was eligible for heaven, then how many of the "newly unsaved" would still try to convert people to Christianity? I think that number would be very, very small.

It would still not change the fact that some people would not want to see others needlessly suffer.

 

[wahrheit]

I believe this to be a false statement. For example if someone molests a child. If God were to stop this, He would have to take away His greatest gift to humanity- the gift of free will. God will punish sin (and the molester) if we are to believe the bible. But He will never take away Free Will, once it has been given.

Darling, I would love "God" to take away his greatest gift – free will – from that child molester at that moment. You are not only a troll, you are sick in my opinion.