Notices
Results 1 to 29 of 29

Thread: How Do You Know God's Telling the Truth?

  1. #1 How Do You Know God's Telling the Truth? 
    Time Lord zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    5,394
    For the purposes of this thread God exists.

    For all those who believe in a god(s), the only thing you know about your deity is what is written in your religion's bible. For some of you god arrived approximately 10-12,000 years ago, same time as creation. Evidence collected by some very intelligent people says otherwise.

    Let's stick with the chronology. Doesn't matter what evidence science has, it all points to an ancient Earth and an even more older universe. This is a major obstacle for creationist thinkers but it could all be settled if we knew God was lying.

    All we have are bibles written by men as evidence of God's honesty. Now if God's dictating to me on what to write then who am I to argue if I notice a few inconsistencies? I just put it on paper, no questions asked. Is God a liar?

    A lot of people say He only tells us what we need to know. Convenient. When we see dubious scriptures attributed to God we find it hard to understand. We cannot fathom God as a liar. It's almost as hard as trying to think of the beginning of the universe. We invent, we make something up to keep God perfect. Do we have to do this? Why not call it what it is?

    A little kid told me this once and I'll offer it to you with some revisions. The gist of it doesn't change. Let's say there once existed a bunch of Gods. They roamed the universe looking for life. One of them finds it here, roughly 12000 years ago. Man is around, dinosaurs are gone and in fact because the newly arrived God doesn't do any homework He doesn't know the dinos even existed. He stakes a claim and concocts the creation story. Sounded good then but like most fabricated stories it eventually fails the litmus test because there's no corroborating evidence.

    Can someone show me proof that God tells the truth? If a little kid can produce a reasonable story to counter biblical claim then why can't most of us? Laugh at that story if you will but it gets God off the hook. Why? Because God didn't know the history, he started His own. On the bright side, someone or something is calling Himself God.


    All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beautiful Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    2,116
    zingy has committed one of the basic faux pas of logic and reasoning.

    He has set up a hypothesis which is contrary to known fact. He has two such errors in his hypothesis.

    First he suggests that God "arrived" here. Assuming God is the creator of the universe, He did not arrive here. Rather, we arrived there.

    That, however, is irrelevant to the second error which is that the coming together of God and universe took place 10 to 12 thousand years ago. If someone else's Bible makes that claim, they will have to defend it.

    There is nothing in the Genesis account whereby one can do any more than stand back and guess as to the time frame which is being described.

    So what evidence do we have that zingy always tells the truth, let alone God. Based on what we have here, I think I will go with God.


    Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. -- Albert Einstein

    If God DID do all of this, is He not the greatest scientist of all? -- dt, 2005
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Guest
    Zinga,

    I am a bit confused by this thread, are you saying that, God said the earth is X thousand years old but we know it ain't so God is lying?

    Your post is, IMHO poorly constructed and appears to be nothing more than msichevious.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Time Lord zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    5,394
    He has set up a hypothesis which is contrary to known fact
    OK

    Assuming God is the creator
    Does that mean assumptions are known facts? The original thread included a disclaimer that indicated God exists for the purpose of argument.

    First he suggests that God "arrived" here.
    The bible suggests God was always here.

    the coming together of God and universe took place 10 to 12 thousand years ago
    Its a story. A rough estimate. A creationist might agree with that figure.
    All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beautiful Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    2,116
    Actually, I think it was zingy who in his original post made the assumption that God exists a prerequisite fact.

    Said zingy to start: "For the purposes of this thread God exists."

    Thus, from the start, we are confronted with an assumption that we must accept as fact for purposes of discussion. I merely phrased my statement such that it was based on the assumption of God rather than a requirement that God exists for the purpose of someone doubting Him.

    Concensus on the age of the universe and Earth has not been reached among the different factions who advocate a specific age. Those who espouse xxx age agree with others who espouse xxx age. Those who espouse yyy age agree with others whe espouse yyy age.

    Truth is, we don't know. We are only making guesses based on the evidences we have and the weight we give to which evidence. Personally, after many years of studying and averaging, I can guess that the universe 14,603,254,174 years, 123 days, 16 hours, 22 minutes, and 13 seconds right now -- MARK! Prove me wrong.

    The idea of taking what someone else has said and trying to use that to prove someone who never said it is a liar is somewhat silly.

    I know of no religious accounting of creation which sets up the scenario you use to question God's integrity.
    Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. -- Albert Einstein

    If God DID do all of this, is He not the greatest scientist of all? -- dt, 2005
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by daytonturner
    I can guess that the universe 14,603,254,174 years, 123 days, 16 hours, 22 minutes, and 13 seconds right now -- MARK! Prove me wrong.
    I can, I found a piece of toast the other day down behind the Cooker, it had clearly been there longer than that.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beautiful Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    2,116
    I wondered where that went!
    Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. -- Albert Einstein

    If God DID do all of this, is He not the greatest scientist of all? -- dt, 2005
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Time Lord zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    5,394
    The idea of taking what someone else has said and trying to use that to prove someone who never said it is a liar is somewhat silly.
    I never said God dated the Earth at 12000 years

    Take a closer look...the gist is the creation story itself not the age of the universe. Today's religions have a story of creation written in their bibles, the bibles are the word of God, therefore its god's story. All I'm saying is what if God lied about it?

    Interpreters decide the age of the universe, not God interpreting His own words.

    I don't mind Dayton's analysis of my words because that is exactly how human's translate written material. Bibles are not immune to the same treatment. People do take bible writings verbatim. People will misinterpret.
    All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beautiful Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    2,116
    I'm not convinced that you can conclude that GOD is lying based on what is being said here. Zingy admits that people can misinterpret.

    My point was that you cannot use someone's interpretation of what someone else said to prove or disprove the truth or lack thereof of the original statement. That is why heresay is not allow in a court of law.

    Suppose I write "Godisnowhere." Someone says I have said, "God is nowhere." Someone else says I have said "God is now here." How can anyone else, based on what either of those two has said about my original claim, judge whether the original claim is true or false?

    Zingy directly asks, "What if God lied about it?" I must respond, "What if it is all true?"

    If God lied, I am really no worse off as a believer than if he is telling the truth. If it is all true, then non-believers are in deep doo-doo. I believe that is a variation of Pascal's Wager.
    Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. -- Albert Einstein

    If God DID do all of this, is He not the greatest scientist of all? -- dt, 2005
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Guest
    The bible if anything is a biography of early christian struggles, written by a number of people long after any events, like any biography, I must agree with dayton - if you want to assume for a moment (as an atheist) that God exists, you can't hold him responsible for what is written.

    NOw if it was an autobiography ie in his own 'hand' then....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beautiful Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    2,116
    megabrain said:
    The bible if anything is a biography of early christian struggles, written by a number of people long after any events, like any biography, I must agree with dayton - if you want to assume for a moment (as an atheist) that God exists, you can't hold him responsible for what is written.
    I can't quite go along with the first part of this. Some of the historical events were written after the fact. Certainly, anything Moses wrote about events prior to the Exodus must be after the fact. However, anything he wrote about events during the Exodus journey would have been contemporaneous to the events.

    I will not get into the idea that some events may have occurred after the writer suggested they would. However, it is really difficult from this late date to make any proclamation as to how long after certain events they were first recorded in writing. Esther was probably written some time after those events and Nehemiah may have written Ezra sometime after those events, but most certainly would have been contemporaneous to the events of his day.

    Whether WE can hold God responsible for what is written is not the real question. The real question is whether God can hold US responsible for what is written.
    Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. -- Albert Einstein

    If God DID do all of this, is He not the greatest scientist of all? -- dt, 2005
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Time Lord zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    5,394
    My point was that you cannot use someone's interpretation of what someone else said to prove or disprove the truth or lack thereof of the original statement.
    Is this based on the belief that I'm an atheist or that someone who believes in God should not question Him? You have no idea whether I am or not if you think that way.

    'I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end' are God's words if I am to believe my religious friends. Let me misinterpret that line. ' I never started or finished anything in all my life'. The first statement is not a lie, is that what you mean? In fact you're saying neither of them is a lie, just misinterpretations of something said, whatever that might have been originally. Ok, my idea of falsehoods has changed dramatically. All lies are misinterpretations

    Pascal is banking on the premis that belief in God is a better value. How did he arrive at that? Did he believe a misinterpretation, someone's interpretation of what someone else said, something like God promises eternal life after death? For all we know we all go somewhere when we die but any of you who believed in a God get recycled as garden slugs and the rest of us enjoy a huge party for eternity. If that is written then I'm sure the wager would not be the same and believers would not think they're better off. Believers would have to doubt the written word. Now we're back to me again.

    Either God said it or not, all wagering aside.
    All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beautiful Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    2,116
    Well, zingy, I don't think we can "know" if the Bible is a pack of lies or the complete and total truth.

    As a believer, I believe it is complete and total truth. But that does not make it so.

    Nor does someone else's belief that it is a book of mythology make it a book of mythology.

    The Bible is to each of us what we think it is regardless of whatever the unknown truth is. Anyone is free to believe that which he chooses to believe about whether the Bible (as God's word) is truth or lie.

    If there is a passage which seems to conflict with my knowledge base I have options to consider. Either my understanding of the passage is flawed, or my knowledge base is flawed, or perhaps some combination of the two. There are any number of passages which others say mean something that I don't think they mean, but that does not make me question God Himself, only what is the correct meaning of the passage.
    So I am not sure that when we question God, we are actually questioning God or if we are questioning our understanding of God.

    Actually, on a personal level, zingy, I think it has been said that you are a refugee from Jehova's Witnesses. If that is true I would not know if you are a never believed, a no longer believes, or are now a believer. But it would make no difference in my response. The only thing that counts on this issue is what one individually believes.

    We do not "know" that God exists. We do not know that God does not exist.

    However, if God does not exist, then non-believers cannot logically ascribe untruth to a non-existent and silent God.

    I often see this incongruity here whereby people who claim not to believe in God continually question His way of running the world and then conclude, based on their disagreement with those ways, that he does not exist. It is kinda like running around in circles.
    Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. -- Albert Einstein

    If God DID do all of this, is He not the greatest scientist of all? -- dt, 2005
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Time Lord zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    5,394
    Quote Originally Posted by daytonturner
    It is kinda like running around in circles.
    It's a lot of fun though.
    All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    93
    Just a detail from the first post.

    zinjanthropos:

    Your original premiss is mistaken.

    "For all those who believe in a god(s), the only thing you know about your deity is what is written in your religion's bible."

    - It's possible to know things about God without reference to any religion or work of literature - but then there could be an endless discussion about the meaning of the word 'God'. I wouldn't want to get into that here.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    321
    For the purpose of argument let's assume werewolves exist:

    If a werewolf and a vampire got into a fight then....?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Professor leohopkins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Dulwich, London, England
    Posts
    1,418
    Then it would be like watching my mother in law and my wife having an argument ?

    Quote Originally Posted by zinjanthropos
    For the purposes of this thread God exists.

    For all those who believe in a god(s), the only thing you know about your deity is what is written in your religion's bible. For some of you god arrived approximately 10-12,000 years ago, same time as creation. Evidence collected by some very intelligent people says otherwise.

    Let's stick with the chronology. Doesn't matter what evidence science has, it all points to an ancient Earth and an even more older universe. This is a major obstacle for creationist thinkers but it could all be settled if we knew God was lying.

    All we have are bibles written by men as evidence of God's honesty. Now if God's dictating to me on what to write then who am I to argue if I notice a few inconsistencies? I just put it on paper, no questions asked. Is God a liar?

    A lot of people say He only tells us what we need to know. Convenient. When we see dubious scriptures attributed to God we find it hard to understand. We cannot fathom God as a liar. It's almost as hard as trying to think of the beginning of the universe. We invent, we make something up to keep God perfect. Do we have to do this? Why not call it what it is?

    A little kid told me this once and I'll offer it to you with some revisions. The gist of it doesn't change. Let's say there once existed a bunch of Gods. They roamed the universe looking for life. One of them finds it here, roughly 12000 years ago. Man is around, dinosaurs are gone and in fact because the newly arrived God doesn't do any homework He doesn't know the dinos even existed. He stakes a claim and concocts the creation story. Sounded good then but like most fabricated stories it eventually fails the litmus test because there's no corroborating evidence.

    Can someone show me proof that God tells the truth? If a little kid can produce a reasonable story to counter biblical claim then why can't most of us? Laugh at that story if you will but it gets God off the hook. Why? Because God didn't know the history, he started His own. On the bright side, someone or something is calling Himself God.
    Simply put. If you speak to God, its called prayer.....

    ...If God speaks to you, then your schitzophrenic.

    Quote Originally Posted by daytonturner
    Well, zingy, I don't think we can "know" if the Bible is a pack of lies or the complete and total truth.

    As a believer, I believe it is complete and total truth. But that does not make it so.

    Nor does someone else's belief that it is a book of mythology make it a book of mythology.

    The Bible is to each of us what we think it is regardless of whatever the unknown truth is. Anyone is free to believe that which he chooses to believe about whether the Bible (as God's word) is truth or lie.

    If there is a passage which seems to conflict with my knowledge base I have options to consider. Either my understanding of the passage is flawed, or my knowledge base is flawed, or perhaps some combination of the two. There are any number of passages which others say mean something that I don't think they mean, but that does not make me question God Himself, only what is the correct meaning of the passage.
    So I am not sure that when we question God, we are actually questioning God or if we are questioning our understanding of God.

    Actually, on a personal level, zingy, I think it has been said that you are a refugee from Jehova's Witnesses. If that is true I would not know if you are a never believed, a no longer believes, or are now a believer. But it would make no difference in my response. The only thing that counts on this issue is what one individually believes.

    We do not "know" that God exists. We do not know that God does not exist.

    However, if God does not exist, then non-believers cannot logically ascribe untruth to a non-existent and silent God.

    I often see this incongruity here whereby people who claim not to believe in God continually question His way of running the world and then conclude, based on their disagreement with those ways, that he does not exist. It is kinda like running around in circles.
    Spot on there mate !!!

    As I've always said, Truth is RELATIVE !!

    Quote Originally Posted by zinjanthropos
    My point was that you cannot use someone's interpretation of what someone else said to prove or disprove the truth or lack thereof of the original statement.
    Is this based on the belief that I'm an atheist or that someone who believes in God should not question Him? You have no idea whether I am or not if you think that way.

    'I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end' are God's words if I am to believe my religious friends. Let me misinterpret that line. ' I never started or finished anything in all my life'. The first statement is not a lie, is that what you mean? In fact you're saying neither of them is a lie, just misinterpretations of something said, whatever that might have been originally. Ok, my idea of falsehoods has changed dramatically. All lies are misinterpretations

    Pascal is banking on the premis that belief in God is a better value. How did he arrive at that? Did he believe a misinterpretation, someone's interpretation of what someone else said, something like God promises eternal life after death? For all we know we all go somewhere when we die but any of you who believed in a God get recycled as garden slugs and the rest of us enjoy a huge party for eternity. If that is written then I'm sure the wager would not be the same and believers would not think they're better off. Believers would have to doubt the written word. Now we're back to me again.

    Either God said it or not, all wagering aside.
    So God is made from a combination of alpha particles and fish oil or cat food?
    hmmm
    The hand of time rested on the half-hour mark, and all along that old front line of the English there came a whistling and a crying. The men of the first wave climbed up the parapets, in tumult, darkness, and the presence of death, and having done with all pleasant things, advanced across No Man's Land to begin the Battle of the Somme. - Poet John Masefield.

    www.leohopkins.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beautiful Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    2,116
    Why not? Sounds like it would be an interesting discussion.
    Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. -- Albert Einstein

    If God DID do all of this, is He not the greatest scientist of all? -- dt, 2005
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beautiful Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    2,116
    Above post was in response to the incognito Ready Weiner.

    As to leohopkins' comment:
    As I've always said, Truth is RELATIVE !!
    Sorry, I can't go along with that. The truth is the truth no matter whether people differ on what it is.

    There are, perhaps, some things which are relative but there are also some things which are absolute. Truth happens to fall into the category of absolutes for me. Whether I know the truth or not is irrelevant. Even if I am 180 degrees wrong, it does not alter the actual truth.

    What is the best flavor of popsickle is something that is relative to a person's individual taste. If I prefer orange and someone else prefers grape, neither of us can be said to be wrong.

    If I say I have a round square, that is impossible and cannot be a matter of being relative. A figure cannot be both round and square at the same time, no matter how much I might tend to believe it and advocate it.

    Truth is not relative and no matter how much one may believe or advocate a lie, it does not make it the truth.
    Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. -- Albert Einstein

    If God DID do all of this, is He not the greatest scientist of all? -- dt, 2005
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,893
    I think perhaps everyone is getting caught up in the finer points of zinjanthropos’s post, but missing his main point. If you believe that God exists, what reason do you have to believe that God tells humans the truth? It says so in the Bible, but if the Bible came from God then this doesn’t really solve the problem...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Ph.D. Nevyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by leohopkins
    So God is made from a combination of alpha particles and fish oil or cat food?
    hmmm
    God is Radioactive? that's new
    Come see some of my art work at http://nevyn-pendragon.deviantart.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope mitchellmckain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Salt Lake City, UTAH, USA
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by Nevyn
    Quote Originally Posted by leohopkins
    So God is made from a combination of alpha particles and fish oil or cat food?
    hmmm
    God is Radioactive? that's new
    To be made of alpha particles does not imply that a thing is radiactive. It is only if the object is emitting alpha particles with some force that would make it is radioactive. To be made of apha particles would only imply a posive electric charge assuming it was not also composed of twice the number of electrons, for an alpha particle is nothing other than the nucleus of a helium atom.

    As for the OP, since I find the premises for it preposterous, I have no comment and like daytonturner I find the this discussion of alpha paricles more interesting.
    See my physics of spaceflight simulator at http://www.relspace.astahost.com

    I now have a blog too: http://astahost.blogspot.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Ph.D. Nevyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by mitchellmckain
    Quote Originally Posted by Nevyn
    Quote Originally Posted by leohopkins
    So God is made from a combination of alpha particles and fish oil or cat food?
    hmmm
    God is Radioactive? that's new
    To be made of alpha particles does not imply that a thing is radiactive. It is only if the object is emitting alpha particles with some force that would make it is radioactive. To be made of apha particles would only imply a posive electric charge assuming it was not also composed of twice the number of electrons, for an alpha particle is nothing other than the nucleus of a helium atom.
    I know, i am not an idiot, i was trying to be funny but obviously it was lost even with the various smily things
    Come see some of my art work at http://nevyn-pendragon.deviantart.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope mitchellmckain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Salt Lake City, UTAH, USA
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by Nevyn

    I know, i am not an idiot, i was trying to be funny but obviously it was lost even with the various smily things
    Well maybe you know that you are not an idiot but how am I supposed to know that, especially when it seem you think I was seriously discussing the possibility that God was made of alpha particles, though I suppose there are more negative descriptions of God. :wink:
    See my physics of spaceflight simulator at http://www.relspace.astahost.com

    I now have a blog too: http://astahost.blogspot.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Time Lord zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    5,394
    Quote Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee
    I think perhaps everyone is getting caught up in the finer points of zinjanthropos’s post, but missing his main point. If you believe that God exists, what reason do you have to believe that God tells humans the truth? It says so in the Bible, but if the Bible came from God then this doesn’t really solve the problem...
    I'll have to work on my syntax(no pun intended).

    Maybe I should have said....Is believing in God the same as trusting Him? or if I believe in God then do I have to trust Him?
    All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beautiful Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    2,116
    Re: Exchange between Nevyn and Mitchell.

    This only goes to prove the old adage: Idle comments are the devil's workshop.

    Scifor attempted to get back on track with this question:

    If you believe that God exists, what reason do you have to believe that God tells humans the truth?
    One would develop an opinion of God's reputation for truthfulness and veracity based on his own experience with God.

    Since we have different experiences, it is quite natural for different people to come to different conclusions. It can also be a matter of what one considers to be a lie. It can also be a matter of what God said as compared to what one understands that to have meant.

    But perhaps the most important factor is one's preconceived notion as to whether God would lie or not. A person who believes God does not lie will make every effort to reconcile apparent discrepancies. A person whose goal is to discredit God, will use such discrepancies to show that God is less than truthful.

    On my own personal level, as a person who believes in God, I would have to say that I believe God tells humans the truth because I have not found anything that I understand in God's word to be a lie.
    Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. -- Albert Einstein

    If God DID do all of this, is He not the greatest scientist of all? -- dt, 2005
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Time Lord zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    5,394
    It can also be a matter of what God said as compared to what one understands that to have meant.
    A person who believes God does not lie will make every effort to reconcile apparent discrepancies.
    Amen.

    Do not take anything God says literally unless it conforms with your own idea of God. If anything divine appears contradictory to something previously stated then it is not a lie but words that need tailoring.

    As long as this is customary then God can never lie. If He concocted the biggest fib ever foisted upon mankind then you would never know, conceive or comprehend it. Is there not the slightest element of doubt associated with anything God says?
    All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beautiful Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    2,116
    zingy proclaims:

    Do not take anything God says literally unless it conforms with your own idea of God. If anything divine appears contradictory to something previously stated then it is not a lie but words that need tailoring.
    Yeah, but don't you give any of those who you love and trust this same benefit of the doubt? If not, I would hate to be your friend.

    If we have a loved one or friend and something comes out that seemingly defies our opinion of that person, what do we do? Do we immediately assume that person is no longer worthy of their reputation with us? Or do we try to find out if the apparent discrepancy is a misunderstanding?

    Sometimes it is a matter of the individual's own personality. Some people are quick to grab on to everything negative said about anyone or anything. Others are unwilling to accept any apparent negative about anything or anyone.

    Others are willing to weigh the entirety of the information before coming to a conclusion.

    As to doubting anything that God has said (in reference to the Bible, I must assume), I am not sure it is necessary to accept or reject it as truth.

    What one can do is regard it from the standpoint of "If this is true, how can it affect my life?" If one considers it untrue, of course, it can have no affect.

    So, I think the analysis is usually more from the perspective of "Geeze, if this is true, I am in deep doo-doo! Therefore, I reject it as being untrue and thereby save myself from the consequences."

    This discussion continues to remind of Pascal's Wager. If the Bible is a lie, why worry about it? If it is not a lie, that is a different matter.
    Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. -- Albert Einstein

    If God DID do all of this, is He not the greatest scientist of all? -- dt, 2005
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Time Lord zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    5,394
    Believe it or not I enjoy seeing the bible reduced to a wager. Diminishes it even more. Better yet, something akin to the Racing Form. Perhaps a little handicapping is in order. How well has the bible done in past discussions? How reasonable would it be for punters to bet on the bible's credibility? Nothing I've seen convinces me that the Bible is even an also-ran, too many dnf's. How about the bible jockeys? Steadfastly resolute in their convictions, never wavering, carrying way too much weight and bent on going straight when the turn approaches.
    All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •