@basilfawlty89 Yes, I know. But the question is: Do the texts that were removed alter who God is and His message of salvation and restoration for us? Or not?

@Pikachu [quote]Pay attention, joe.[/quote] (I fall to my knees, adoring Pikachu's devout belief that miracles will happen)

@ms20182878 If pieces have been added or taken away without a clear reason, the whole thing become unreliable. Also, if it's altered by anyone other than "god" (whatever that means) it cannot be said the be "god's word".

@newjaninev2
You introduced this universality of yours.
I am not going to quibble with a pretender let alone you have [b][big]No[/big][/b] clue on scripture.
Just run along.

@Aliveshock universality? You're objecting to universality?

Let's be very clear about this.

I originally referred to universal expansion.

[b]You[/b] claimed that it should rightfully be called inflation

[b]You[/b] then started a campaign of deceit in which you claimed that I 'misuse scientific terms' (whatever those are supposed to be!)

I then pointed out to you that universal expansion and cosmic inflation prefer to [i]two different events[/i]

It appears that [b]you[/b] are now trying to claim that universal expansion is not, in fact, universal (I say 'appears' because it's difficult to know what you're actually trying to say... although it's painfully obvious what you're trying not to say)

[b]You[/b] suddenly began acting as if [b]you[/b] had not made the initial mistake.

[b]You[/b] are now trying to divert, distract, and run away

@newjaninev2
You are just one of those small time believers in the “Big Bang”. Hawking is dead and so now you are abandoned to believe in a very very old theory that started out as a “cosmic egg” by a Catholic priest but I don’t expect you to know that; just live in your self absorbed bubble while the adults in the room analyze the new data by Gaia that has nothing to do with the crap you proliferate. Evidence, data, science is better off with it innocent audrey.

@ms20182878 It's important to realize the mental hoops the faithful will jump through, some far more preposterous than those, to rationalize the loonier passages in that big bible slush-pile, e.g. Psycho pSaul's advice to treat those who hate you to kindness for the incredibly nasty, entirely un-Christlike passive-agressive reason that "you'll heap burning coals on their heads that way." I once heard some wacko theory he was referring to some penitents recorded somewhere who carried coals on their heads... with no evidence that pSaul knew anything about them, nor any explanation how these two thoughts are related. Just, y'know, he couldn't be a violent, sociopathic lunatic (despite the fact that's exactly what pSaul was before his life-changing heat-stroke Jesus-hallucination.) After the gospel news about Jesus's execution for preaching that religious hatred and judgemental pride is heretical error, I can sum up the remainder of the bible as saying: "See how badly this religious stuff can mess you up? Just love your neighbor."
But I'll say again, while I'm reporting my belief system and joining others in pointing out the weaknesses in a common traditional one, I am not at all interested in converting any who humbly love and serve the god they find in the bible... as long as they don't use it to abuse other people's lives.

@ms20182878 Hating the gays is only one out of several interpretations of pSaul's rant about some who give themselves up to unnatural lusts. There are some devout Christians in this big ol' world who read a pro-gay message in pSaul's rant about men making themselves eunuchs for the sake of the god of Truth. But of course that reading is wrong and yours is right, because... because... well, no one can find a "because."

@ms20182878 "He is probably not very pleased."
Because you thought to write "probably," I would defend your freedom to hold such an opinion, and admire your humble devotion to a traditional faith. But today there's a deadly mental plague, caused by fake-religious political leaders all around the world, who have led masses of ignorant frightened humans by their faithful noses into detesting masses of other humans because they imagine it's a KNOWN FACT that The One True God hates [fill in the blank].
One of them is a goddamn GENERAL in the US Air Force, on record as saying of Muslims: "We're fighting them because our god is bigger than their god."

@MissPriscillaPrim Yes, I understand the definition of "proof". The difficulty is that we live in a culture of relative truth... so many people believe that they can define what is true for them and what is not true... and that can be different from what is true/not true for someone else. I have been trying to work around this problem by asking people what their criteria is... but it seems that no one likes to share the details of their criteria, they want to keep their criteria very general. When the criteria for proving truth is too general, the proof decision (true/false) becomes very subjective.

@ms20182878 I use this sort of web forum strictly for entertainment, enjoying the gamut of written behavior from communally sharing to abusive, from healthy advice to raving nonsense. (And I've contributed to all styles, I admit.) I trust we all know the last thing that's going to happen is a fundamental change of anyone's opinions here.

@MissPriscillaPrim 🙂

Actually I doubt you know the meaning of compelling.@newjaninev2

@newjaninev2

god damn but i love joe.😁
What a noodle

@newjaninev2 Nope. I didn't miss the word "compelling". Many who turn to Him as an adult are at a point in their life where they feel compelled because they are overwhelmed by His love.

@ms20182878 As there are scientific theories that I accept, it's clear those criteria are met.

@suzie1960 Yes, I understand. But for most of us, the "criteria" becomes... do I believe it... or not. Our criteria isn't very definable and it changes with the situation.

@ms20182878 Speak for yourself. The criterion for a scientific theory is basically whether it consistently and repeatedly explains the observed facts and is falsifiable.

@whowasthatmaskedman The phrase "for that day or hour, no one knows" was commonly used in reference to the first day of each month, when the watchmen on the corner of the temple were watching for that first sliver of a new moon to denote the first day of the month. So, in the culture, that phrase is connected with the first day of the month.

When you pick a single verse, it is easy to miss the context. In one of Paul's letter he continues on and says something like "But you are not ignorant, you know the signs". So it is always good to read the context around the verse in question.

@ms20182878 I knew I should have added that bit about the devil siting scripture for his own purposes. Look. There are just too many reasons why predictions of the future based on the bible are (and I struggle not to be insulting here) impossible. From the source scrolls. (most of which never made it into the original version. Did you know there are in fact over 70 commandments?) To the repeated editing in translations and updatings. (which wrote a Goddess out completely.) Its a fair old story. But so is Grimms fairytales and Aesops Fables. And I wont be predicting the end of days on them either. If your God was around, I think he would be holding his nose and getting ready to flush earth down the celestial crapper. And if thats the case. not much I can do will change it. But if this is his creation I see no reason to hope for better from heaven and am happy I wont be seeing it one way or another.
I think we are done here.😉

@whowasthatmaskedman It's a truly nasty Christian heresy that's got a stranglehold on American society now, led by our Federal Christo-Taliban. Too many seem to abuse the bible for just two purposes: learning whom to hate, and finding links between obscure bible verses and the news headlines. Charity, humility? Zilch.
But NOT ALL Christians are in that camp, not even in the US. Just the loudest fragment.

@ArishMell Yes, in the responses below it was pretty clear that the minds and hearts of most people are closed to the possibility of believing. It really takes a personal encounter with God to change their mind.

@ms20182878
I think one does admit that, but his calling God "Yahweh" suggests to me he has been recruited by one of the more cultish organisations.

I do know several practicing Christians among my various circles of friends, of whom two are vicars and another was ordained as a deacon this year - I was among the invitees to the ordination service.

What of course we don't know about the more negative responses, are their backgrounds. For example, some might have rejected religion having had it rammed down their throats as children by parental bullying, others may have examined it sympathetically but found it not necessary to their own lives; others may have always rejected deities as being too incredible. A few might be from atheist or at least agnostic backgrounds and have seen no reason to change their views.


One or two try the God v. Science theme, but I think that too simple. Yes, some ways of worshipping God involve calling the natural sciences "lies"; some of the sciences make believing in God difficult or impossible for some people. Yet I think these miss a crucial difference rarely mentioned in discussions like this. It is this:

- [i]Religion[/i] believes as pure faith with no desire for evidence even for itself, that the Universe and all in it were created and are being "operated" by that faith's god, or God. It does not seek to ask "How" and "When", despite the Late Bronze-Age Hebrew tribal myth or metaphor of Genesis. Nor does it really ask "For Whom" and "Why", but as I have found, trying to answer "Why" yourself raises a rather unsettling possibility! Sadly, it can easily allow man-made imposing of blind faith in ancient, humanly-written texts, rather than open, welcoming acceptance of what its deity might actually have done.

- [i]Science [/i]seeks to understand "How and When". It does not try to ask "By Who, For Whom, and Why". And it does so by trial of evidence, test and hypothesis, accepting each explanation found may yet prove faulty or even totally incorrect as techniques and knowledge expand to discover new evidence.

Consequently, it is possible to be an astronomer or geologist and still be religious, although not so easily, and it may need a very open mind and humble acceptance of that crucial difference. In fact, if I were a believer in God, I would take the science as showing me that God's works are far greater and more beautiful than the religion's very-human founders and many of their pre-Science followers genuinely could possibly have imagined.


In the end though, it still comes back to personal calling, and though I do not believe in God I do know that very many people find great comfort is doing so.

All religions ever invented, including those long-gone or merely hinted at by archaeological finds, seem to answer two innate human yearnings.
One is to accept our place in the Scheme of Things - and far beyond the anthropocentricity of the Ancient Greeks, followed by the Church of Rome until historically fairly recently.
The other is to find "spiritual" support (however you define that) to lessen the fear of death and act as a "bereavement counsellor", for millennia before the term was invented.

@uknaked So, tell me... Why would that be convincing to you? I'm trying to follow your logic...

@ms20182878 It would not necessarily convince me about anything, but the actions of religious leaders make it impossible to realistically believe anybody! If they took steps to come together to help humanity, rather than kill it, they might get a modicum of respect. But all they care about is themselves, not stopping the violence, by removing fundamentalist insanity.

@hippyjoe1955 Believe me, we can all see you have learned nothing from anything else you ever head or read... deadhead.

@MissPriscillaPrim you have a point there. If you come your hair right no one will notice.

@hippyjoe1955 ... "come-your come-your hair doo bedoo dum dum..."

@Enough4me And that's your choice.

@puck61 [@puck61 I understand that. I also understand why you felt the need to reiterate it. No worries

@Enough4me Thanks for your transparent answer! 🙂

@whowasthatmaskedman I like those two. I like the 'deliberate no nonsense' vibe he puts out.

@puck61 Oh, My Friend... there are no consequences to fear. I like to have a good discussion that hopefully doesn't degenerate into personal insults... with the goal of encouraging folks to really think about what they believe to be true. I have been honored in my life to be used by the Lord in some situations that resulted in some pretty amazing and breathtaking outcomes... so I can definitely imagine Elijah on Mount Carmel.

@ms20182878 I believe in God and I believe in "Godshots" I have an adolescent-like impulsiveness when it comes to sharing about the gift of grace. I think it is the simplicity that makes so many 'draw back'. People say to themselves, "It can't be that simple!" My faith is strong, but my fundamentalist friends would think me a heretic.

@ms20182878 Appreciate your thoughtful analysis, and though I don't agree with it all, this does nothing to diminish my new-found respect for you. I should have started with less hostility, but y'know, the social environment of this website kinda corrodes my patience at times.

@MissPriscillaPrim Thank you SO MUCH for your humble response! Thank you, My Friend!

@ms20182878 Don't overdo it.

@SW-User Can you explain how that would cause you to believe?

@ms20182878 For a million dollars I will believe any stupid thing you want.

@SW-User So, the money wouldn't actually CAUSE you to believe, but you could be PAID to believe at the right price. OK...

@Memyself20 Thanks.

@ImperialAerosolKidFromEP Can you kindly define who you mean by "they"?

@ms20182878 anyone who says "evidence". If you want a spokesman, though, I'd say Dawkins is a good example

@ms20182878 My point is, seek answers elsewhere if interested.

@ms20182878 [quote]Can I ask how you determined that a belief in the God of the Bible was obligatory in those times? [/quote]
I said it was [b]almost[/b] obligatory. The church exercised great power in those days. People in the West were expected to be christian. Even now there is something of a presumption that a white European is christian unless he or she emphatically states otherwise.

@suzie1960 The authority of the church was often also backed by strong social conformity.

@Mrsbetweenfatandfit He tells us to seek after Him, and He will make His face shown to us. I'm so glad to hear that you have seen the evidence of the God of the Bible in the lives of others... Ask them how you too can know Him. And, if you have no one whom you feel comfortable asking... Ask me, either here or by PM.