Honest questions for believers.....

by Paulapollos 52 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Paulapollos

  RockyGirl,

  Your answers are really quite thought-provoking. I could be wrong here, and so feel free to tell me to shut my trap, but it seems to me that in actual fact, you believe in belief in God, rather than believe in a personal, transcendental God, who has a purpose and is intervening in history.

  I totally understand about the need to “believe in something bigger than myself.” I suppose as Daniel Dennet says, there are numerous hypothesis as to why humans may feel the need to “believe”. But I was a little confused about your comment as to “there is not absolute, provable truth.” I think that what you are probably referring to is relativism in morals, values, ethics and philosophy. In that sense, I would probably agree.

  But perhaps what is driving my questions to you is this – are there not absolute truths? For instance, are you saying that it cannot be “proved” that humans evolved, or that the origin of life is naturalistic? Are you saying that it cannot be “proved” that the desire to “believe” and seek “supernatural” explanations are biologically rooted? Take for instance the desire to believe in something bigger than ourselves, a supernatural force. Is it “immaterial” whether that force exists or not – in other words, is all that matters our desire to believe in it? Surely, truth is very important – surely, it does actually matter whether our measurable beliefs are true, because beliefs impact the way we treat others, and determine the quality of our lives? Again, RockyGirl, thanks for discussing this with me.

  PP
• 

  Paulapollos

  Hi Psac,

  Thanks for your post. It’s interesting when you say that the Bible is a progressive revelation of God. So does that mean that you accept there are errors in it? How does that play into your view of whether it is inspired? Do you believe the Bible to be free from error? If not, how do you determine what is right and wrong in the Bible? Personal preference?

  When you say, “take the Bible for what it is and what it is NOT”, what exactly do you mean? By saying that, surely you are saying that the Bible is “something” and “is not something else” – so I cannot just choose what that is, according to my personal preference! Surely, the Bible is “something”, independent of what I might choose it to mean? Otherwise what value does the Bible actually have?

  I do understand your analogy of a finger, but I need to ask you this – how can you view it as a finger pointing to God, if you accept it might be a human book, full of revision, redaction and compilation? I presume that you don’t view it as that – so how do you account for the views of scholars who have studied the history of the Bible?

  Psac, like I said, I was very much a believer in Christ. I know the “answer” to “why I believe that suffering is wrong, and where I base that from.” The problem is, that very moral sense is outraged by the activities of God! So if it is from God, how is it that God is not acting according to the very moral sense that he designed? How do you account for that?

  I really do appreciate you discussing this with me Psac.

  PP
• 

  snowbird

  I believe in all of the Bible, yet, at the same time, I'm of the opinion that some parts have been mangled - deliberately or unwittingly. Since the Bible teaches the existence of an evil entity that it calls Devil and Satan, and that said entity is out to mislead, imo, it's not a reach to assume the Bible would be the main target of such a deceiver.

  I reiterate: In Biblical times, completely vanquishing one's enemies was the order of the day. Show no mercy. Take no prisoners. Warfare at its ugliest. YHWH didn't shrink from using the sword, He was willing to get down and dirty, as it were. Heck, He didn't even spare His own people from His wrath. To me, this shows that He doesn't ask anything of us that He's not willing to do Himself.

  Yeah, some of His actions are troubling, but I really admire Him for that.

  Syl
• 

  leavingwt

  . . .

  But just for fun let's also grant the Bible's divine authorship. Still we have work to do. We must wonder how we can ever be certain that we know what the Bible means. Christians don't even agree on proper hermeneutics, after all. Is the Bible the infallible Word of God, never affirming anything that's false? Does infallibility only relate to the Bible's spiritual teachings and not to its scientific assertions? For that matter, is infallibility itself really a required belief for a Christian? Perhaps the Bible is of entirely human authorship, but reporting on genuine encounters with God. Those are just a few possibilities. Of course, it is a commonplace to find intelligent and sincere people coming to diametrically opposed conclusions about what the Bible teaches. And given the track record of theologians dogmatically asserting that the Bible taught certain things (say, that Adam and Eve were real people and were the only people on Earth after their creation) only to have to recant later, how can we have any confidence that the theologians actually know what they are doing?

  So for the skeptic there are four levels of difficulty before Christian theology even gets off the ground: Does God exist? If He exists, does He have the attributes Christianity says He has? If yes, does the Bible provide correct information regarding His desires and intentions? And if yes to that, how are we to understand the Bible? Theologians need strong, compelling answers to these questions if we are ever to be confident that they are not just reasoning idly within an implausible axiom system. They don't have those answers. Worse, in each case there are strong reasons for thinking the correct answers to those questions are not what the theologians would like them to be.

  . . .

  http://scienceblogs.com/evolutionblog/2011/07/where_can_i_find_the_really_go.php
• 

  Paulapollos

  Snowbird,

  thanks for that. At least you are upfront about your views. But it seems (I could be wrong) you are saying you have no problem with God killing people who disagree with him, or choose not to obey him. I can't understand that - your posts on this forum are generally very loving, very kind, very thoughtful. Yet you admire God for killing people, for exercising their free will?!!!

  PP
• 

  Paulapollos

  LeavingWT,

  that is a fantastic quote. thank you

  PP
• 

  PSacramento

  Hi Psac,

  Thanks for your post. It’s interesting when you say that the Bible is a progressive revelation of God. So does that mean that you accept there are errors in it? How does that play into your view of whether it is inspired? Do you believe the Bible to be free from error? If not, how do you determine what is right and wrong in the Bible? Personal preference?

  There is an interesting book, it is a good suggested reading: God's Word in Human Words, by Kenton Sparks

  I agree with most of what he says.

  Is the bible free from error?

  That woudl depend what error's you are talking about, the bible is a historical telling of a people and their God.

  It is not a science book to anything like that. As an example:Genesis decribes WHY the universe came to be not the technical HOW.

  I believe the bible to have been written by inspired Men for the people of THEIR time.

  When you say, “take the Bible for what it is and what it is NOT”, what exactly do you mean? By saying that, surely you are saying that the Bible is “something” and “is not something else” – so I cannot just choose what that is, according to my personal preference! Surely, the Bible is “something”, independent of what I might choose it to mean? Otherwise what value does the Bible actually have?

  We can't take the bible as being a science book or a book about how to deal with life in the 21st century, can we?

  I do understand your analogy of a finger, but I need to ask you this – how can you view it as a finger pointing to God, if you accept it might be a human book, full of revision, redaction and compilation? I presume that you don’t view it as that – so how do you account for the views of scholars who have studied the history of the Bible?

  I do indeed view it to be a book that was written by inspired men and edited and compliated by other Men, some inspired and some simply doing their jobs.

  Psac, like I said, I was very much a believer in Christ. I know the “answer” to “why I believe that suffering is wrong, and where I base that from.” The problem is, that very moral sense is outraged by the activities of God! So if it is from God, how is it that God is not acting according to the very moral sense that he designed? How do you account for that?

  Which activites of God outrage you so?

  I really do appreciate you discussing this with me Psac.

  I appreciate your thought provoking questions :)

  In short:

  It falls on the INDIVIDUAL to decide how THEY must interpret the bible, no one can do it for you, as much as the JW's and other organized religions would like you to believe.

  The responsibility is on you.

  God's grace has given you his unconditional love BUT it is up to you to decide what YOU will do with it.
• 

  PSacramento

  And given the track record of theologians dogmatically asserting that the Bible taught certain things (say, that Adam and Eve were real people and were the only people on Earth after their creation) only to have to recant later, how can we have any confidence that the theologians actually know what they are doing?

  It's funny because AUgustine was commenting on this VERY thing 1700 years ago and warning against people not doing this very thing.

  It's is far better to say we don't know when we don't know then to make soemthing up that later makes is look foolish, no?

  This is nothing new in the 21st century.

  The questions have always been asked and will always continued to be asked.
• 

  leavingwt

  The questions have always been asked and will always continued to be asked.

  If only they could be asked by the pastors of fundamentalist churches. It wasn't until I associated with 'liberal' Christians and atheists that I heard these questions. Far more common is the CERTAINTY being preached by Fundamentlists, here in the Bible Belt.

  It's is far better to say we don't know when we don't know then to make soemthing up that later makes is look foolish, no?

  Yes!
• 

  leavingwt

  Why would I like these questions to be asked? Examine history. This 'certainty' that I speak of his been used to promote hate and discrimination against a variety of groups. It's totally uncalled for. Fear and prejudices fueled by religion can be a potent, dangereous force. Thankfully, we're making some progress and things are drastically better today than they were just a decade ago. There is still much progress to be made, however.