posted
Isn't the baptism of dead people by Mormons little different than the baptism of infants by Christians? In either case, the person being baptized has no say in the matter.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I'm sure the usual suspects will throw a fit, but I'm big on self-identification when it comes to religion, the borders being so ill-defined anyway. Having said that, between the LDS and mainstream Protestantism there is probably a gap not much smaller than that between Catholics and Manicheans, back in the 300s or so.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by TSN: Isn't the baptism of dead people by Mormons little different than the baptism of infants by Christians? In either case, the person being baptized has no say in the matter.
Well, yeah.
Although from what I recall of my history, the sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation were originally performed at the same time, back when most of the newcomers to the Church were converts. Over time that practice got perverted as people started to think that there was no other possible way.
If you go back even further, even the Jews didn't originally claim that their god was the ONLY god. The First Commandment is most basically translated as "Thou shalt have no other gods ABOVE me" -- not "other than me."
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
The no other god above me statement is more about the context of the time. The Israelites had just come out of Egypt, who have gods up the wazzu, and were about to travel through the wilderness and despite that ominous name their were inhabitants there who had their own gods. God, through Moses and the Ten Commandments, was merely stating his position above these other gods because the Israelities would see these others worshiping as feverently as God's worshippers and that would cause one to wonder who is better, God or Baal? By saying that He is above even the most powerfulthing in mankinds imagination (the supernatural) He is saying that he is greater. The obvious problem with all of this is whether to believe it or not. If God was the author of the Bible, through humans, then its all right and true. But if he's not the author... well then I guess I'm screwed. If he didn't write it, the only question I have is how did over a dozen different writers over two thousand years write 66 books about the same thing without any errors, incositances, or fallibilties? And have that same book be translatable to any language and be relevent to everyone? You don't have to believe any of it, I do, but the choice is yours.
Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:The no other god above me statement is more about the context of the time.
And this does not qualify as a change? I would point out that the early books of the Bible never disclaim the existence of other gods. In fact, I believe that Moses himself (with God's help according to the story) pulled a few displays in the Court of Pharaoh to try to one-up the Pharaoh's own gods and magicians?
Does that not acknowledge the existence of other gods? Or if that part of the story is not true, then does that not discredit the idea of divine inspiration for the Bible?
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
It's Aaron who gets tapped to do the staffs into snakes trick and others, I believe, though God shows Moses how to do them first.
quote: 8 And the LORD spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying, 9 When Pharaoh shall speak unto you, saying, Shew a miracle for you: then thou shalt say unto Aaron, Take thy rod, and cast it before Pharaoh, and it shall become a serpent. 10 And Moses and Aaron went in unto Pharaoh, and they did so as the LORD had commanded: and Aaron cast down his rod before Pharaoh, and before his servants, and it became a serpent.
Exodus 7:8-10
I'm curious how many languages our earnest friend has read the Bible in.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
If your refering to me, I have to say only one, but I do often refer back to the Greek or Hebrew texts.
Next... There is a difference between an actual god and the idea of a god. I could make up a god, give him really neat super powers, and make him a statue out of the finest marble, but it doesn't make him real; its just my imaginary god. Now the obvious response is then, what is God but an imaginary god, what has he done lately to prove himself?? Why doesn't he perform his tricks like he did on the old days, calling down fire on this and that?? To that I don't have an answer (in fact there is alot I don't have the answer to). Maybe he is, just becuase the Bible seems to be full of just the miraculous (floods, Sodom and Gohmorah, ect.) doesn't mean the God didn't and doesn't work now in a more subtle way. If he is the creator than he made the mountains and the universe, but he also made the flowers, ocean currents, and the wind. Majestic vs. subtle or inspiring, creation tells alot about God's character, he wouldn't have made flowers if he just cared about majesty and power, or vice virca (just think, a planet full of flowers and pink ponies...). What's happening now and what probably was happening in the years between those great miracles was probably just God preparing people to respond to those miracles subtly.
Again takes this with your own grain of salt, I'm just trying to answer what I know and believe for myself.
Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
it's obvious that God has had no qualms about revealing his presence to us mere mortals. And yet obviously he's also willing to strike those same people down if they choose not to believe him -- witness the Israelites.
They broke the contract, and were His property to begin with, for more than one reason. And again, He knows the possible results of His actions, or lack thereof. It's kind of a blanket cover, of course, but there's no logical flaw in it.
God literally DID reveal himself to Israel, and gave them the free will to choose. And when they chose (briefly) to NOT believe, then he was going to wipe them out! How can that possibly be considered free will?
He didn't just reveal Himself, He freed them at the same time. They were His property, and His tool to accomplish His goals. He could just as easily have left them to die in Egypt.
I submit that the Jewish God of the Old Testament is fundamentally different from the God that Jesus represented
Well, I've got a perfectly consistant theory that explains how He could be, so unless you care to find a hole in that theory...
what about the act of sending Jesus to Earth in the first place? That seems a more significant intervention in general than any specific thing Jesus would have done.
Hmm. True. However, that's intervention that gives us more choices, so maybe we can say that God intervenes so long as it's for the purpose of giving us the option to be saved. Work?
Here's an even simpler question: if God has given Humans free will, then why should we be punished for choosing not to believe in him?
Not punishment so much as the nature of existence, remember? The only way to live is to be with God, we can't be with God except through Christ, therefore we must accept Christ to live. Of course, I suppose it can also be punishment, for those who know the truth and consciously reject it.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:I'm curious how many languages our earnest friend has read the Bible in.
It's best when read in the original Klingon.
Really.
"Original Sin" is a Klingon concept, if there ever was one.
quote:If he is the creator than he made the mountains and the universe, but he also made the flowers, ocean currents, and the wind. Majestic vs. subtle or inspiring, creation tells alot about God's character, he wouldn't have made flowers if he just cared about majesty and power, or vice virca (just think, a planet full of flowers and pink ponies...).
And mosquitos, and the ebola virus, and cockroaches, and syphilis, and piranhas, and sand fleas, and tuberculosis, and malaria, and bubonic plague, and smallpox, and anthrax, and...
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:They broke the contract, and were His property to begin with, for more than one reason. And again, He knows the possible results of His actions, or lack thereof. It's kind of a blanket cover, of course, but there's no logical flaw in it.
Ah, that's so much more clear. And so when I was a one-month-old infant, before I could do anything but eat, sleep, and cry, I made a "contract" with God, and now I'm going to hell for using the powers of reasoning in a way that I think is right?
I don't see how I can have free will and be God's property at the same time. Either I have a choice to believe what I choose based on free will and reasoning based on what I see, or else I don't, and I do not have free will to make my own choices.
quote:Not punishment so much as the nature of existence, remember? The only way to live is to be with God, we can't be with God except through Christ, therefore we must accept Christ to live. Of course, I suppose it can also be punishment, for those who know the truth and consciously reject it.
As I see it, there are five billion people living in this world without your God, and though there are plenty of problems, they're no worse off for the most part than any Christian people.
What you are saying is that I have no choice but to believe in God. That is NOT free will. Not by a long shot.
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
More like hospital free will. You can leave, but if you do, you're gonna die.
As I see it, there are five billion people living in this world without your God, and though there are plenty of problems, they're no worse off for the most part than any Christian people.
Operative words being "as you see it".
And so when I was a one-month-old infant, before I could do anything but eat, sleep, and cry, I made a "contract" with God, and now I'm going to hell for using the powers of reasoning in a way that I think is right?
'Scuse me? Did I miss my implying this? ISRAEL had a contract with God. I said nothing about you.
What you are saying is that I have no choice but to believe in God.
Did I say that?
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
"However, that's intervention that gives us more choices, so maybe we can say that God intervenes so long as it's for the purpose of giving us the option to be saved. Work?"
Did I wander into the Tech Forum by mistake? What's all this theorization? "Maybe we can say"? You admit you're pulling this stuff out of your ass as you go along?
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:'Scuse me? Did I miss my implying this? ISRAEL had a contract with God. I said nothing about you.
Right, so essentially we have to reword the statement to read: "There was this one month old infant, and before he (or she) could do anything but eat, sleep, and cry, he (or she) made a 'contract' with God, and now, let's say twenty years later, he (or she) is going to hell for using his (or her) powers of reasoning in a way that he (or she) thinks is right."
quote:Originally posted by Omega: Operative words being "as you see it".
Sounds to me like this is the pot calling the kettle black...
quote:'Scuse me? Did I miss my implying this? ISRAEL had a contract with God. I said nothing about you.
It's called "Baptism." As a Christian, you've probably heard of it...
quote:What you are saying is that I have no choice but to believe in God.
Did I say that?
Yes, you did. "The only way to live is to be with God, we can't be with God except through Christ, therefore we must accept Christ to live. Of course, I suppose it can also be punishment, for those who know the truth and consciously reject it."
Allow me to use another analogy. Perhaps you might relate to this one better, Omega.
Let's start with the metaphor of God as our "Father." That would make us "children." Children of God, as the saying goes, right? Well, based on the assumption of life after death, in Heaven, we are all spiritually little children. Either infants, or young children. Adulthood would be the equivalent of entering Heaven to live with God.
Now, for Human children on this planet, it is the parents' responsibility to teach their children, and to provide for them. And teaching them does not involve a simple three-year crash course in living. A parent must be there for their child for ten to twenty years, helping them to learn to live on their own. Providing constant help, love, advice, and care as necessary.
It would be considered bad parenting for a father to leave his two-year-old in the care of his five-year-old, and only occasionally send letters from Hawaii every few months or so after that providing advice.
Grade schools function by having adults teach classes of students a variety of lessons pertinent to their age group. As the children learn what's required, they graduate on to the next level, and eventually learn enough to live on their own.
I've never heard of a school where a teacher will teach one year of first graders and then retire, and have those first graders teach the next year's class.
I submit, therefore, that the Christian God does not exist, especially not in the way presented in the Bible, because his nature as described is wholly inconsistent with his alleged actions. Your logic is furthermore invalid. Some god might exist, but that god would see no reason for me to go to hell (if hell existed) simply because I'm using my own capacity for reason and the provided facts.
Heck, let me take this child analogy one step further. A child grows up in a household, cared for by two loving parents -- until both of those parents leave for reasons unknown when the kid is five years old. After that, the child grows up in an orphanage -- cared for, provided with anything necessary, but with only the vague memory of his parents. Later, that child graduates from college and moves far, far away, and the parents come back and are mad that the child never writes to them, never comes to visit. And so the parents go out and kill their kid because of that.
How does that make any sense?
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
