All Activity

Oh, God said to Abraham, "Kill me a son" Abe say, "Man, you must be puttin' me on" God say, "No", Abe say, "What?" God say, "You can do what you want Abe But the next time you see me comin', you better run "Well", Abe said, "Where you want this killin' done?" God said, "Out on Highway 61"

Did Abraham misunderstand? (There's probably a glove for that.) One might expect him to be admonished for not understanding, for not listening and for not obeying what Yahweh actually said and meant. But, no, he was rewarded for doing exactly as commanded. The Sacrifice of Isaac (NET) 22 Some time after these things God tested Abraham. He said to him, “Abraham!” “Here I am!” Abrahamreplied. 2 God said, “Take your son—your only son, whom you love, Isaac—and go to the land of Moriah! Offer him up there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains which I will indicate to you.” 3 Early in the morning Abraham got up and saddled his donkey. He took two of his young servants with him, along with his son Isaac. When he had cut the wood for the burnt offering, he started out for the place God had spoken to him about. 4 On the third day Abraham caught sight of the place in the distance. 5 So he said to his servants, “You two stayhere with the donkey while the boy and I go up there. We will worship and then return to you.” 6 Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and put it on his son Isaac. Then he took the fire and the knifein his hand, and the two of them walked on together. 7 Isaac said to his father Abraham, “My father?” “What is it, my son?” he replied. “Here is the fire and the wood,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?” 8 “God will provide for himself the lamb for the burnt offering, my son,” Abraham replied. The two of them continued on together. 9 When they came to the place God had told him about, Abraham built the altar there and arranged the woodon it. Next he tied up his son Isaac and placed him on the altar on top of the wood. 10 Then Abraham reached out his hand, took the knife, and prepared to slaughter his son. 11 But the angel of the Lord called to him fromheaven, “Abraham! Abraham!” “Here I am!” he answered. 12 “Do not harm the boy!” the angel said. “Do not do anything to him, for now I know that you fear God because you did not withhold your son, your only son, from me.” 13 Abraham looked up and saw behind him a ram caught in the bushes by its horns. So he went over and got the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering instead of his son. 14 And Abraham called the name of that place “The Lord provides.” It is said to this day, “In the mountain of the Lord provision will be made.” 15 The angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven 16 and said, “I solemnly swear by my own name, decrees the Lord, that because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, 17I will indeed bless you, and I will greatly multiply your descendants so that they will be as countless as the starsin the sky or the grains of sand on the seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the strongholds of their enemies. 18 Because you have obeyed me, all the nations of the earth will pronounce blessings on one another using the name of your descendants.”

I don't think that means much to a growing number of people who prefer to subjectively read the bible for what value certain parts hold for them. The only difference with them and atheists is that atheists stopped seeing value in any of it. But that doesn't prohibit either group from discussing it.

When I let go of my belief in God and "his word," other than feeling a brief loss over there being no life after death as described in the bible, only a feeling of relief existed. I could stop trying to figure out god, and I didn't have to worry about people going through the great tribulation and other such nonsense. But letting go of God as the creator had a lot of emotions attached to it as I discovered last night. Without having anything to do with the bible, the love that I have for nature and the awe at what are bodies are capable of doing always made God seem real to me. I've decided to stop focusing on what Christians have to say about evolution and their attempts to make it fit with creation. I figure it's better to spend that time learning about evolution for myself. I have heard people who have studied how life evolved as part of their career say there is a wonder to it. So, I took out several books from the library today, none that are heavy reading to get me started.

Good point. There are tons of Bible stories that make no sense when you look at them dispassionately. Abraham is just the tip of the iceberg.

Thankfully, there are others who contribute to this post. And I figure, any time Chockfull posts, then it's open for replies.

Obviously no one is entitled to an opinion on scripture except chockfull, so you should just accept that you're wrong, biased and wearing sh!t-colored glasses because if you don't, you might kill another Christian GSer to keep him from posting. Is that how it works now? Self-appointed prophets are ok because they have faith. Non-theists are blinded by bias because they reject God

All I remember is that vpw taught Abraham "misunderstood" what God meant. If this was true, God would have known this immediately and yet he waits until the last second where Isaac sees the knife being raised above him to correct Abraham. That teaching was simply to blame Abraham and stop God from looking horrendous. The writer of Hebrews 11:17-19 did not take Genesis 22 figuratively. Hebrews 11:17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, 18Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called: 19Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure. This confirms that God did tell Abraham to kill Isaac and the mention of it in Hebrews 11 is to draw attention to Abraham's faith which is why he was willing to obey such a hideous command. (A faith, BTW, that believers are expected to follow Heb 12:1) I stand by my previous post that Gen 22 is a ridiculous story meant to teach obedience. Any relationship it has to John 3:16 only shows God is no greater than Abraham in being willing to give up their only begotten son.

Couple of points. First, I would seriously not brag about being in that company. Second, that I chased DWBH off the site is a slanderous lie. That you believe your so-called insider information WITHOUT HAVING DISCUSSED IT WITH ME speaks volumes about your fact-finding efforts. Had you one OUNCE of decency and fairness, you would have contacted me for my side of the story. You never did. You judged me on the word of a man who has chased every close friend out of his life with his increasingly unhinged behavior. But you never even ASKED for my side of the story. Why don't you ask oldiesman how DWBH treated him before I had to step in? Because that would be fair and that's the last thing you want. Has OS seen any meaningful eclipses lately? What did they mean? Before you go trusting his lying-ass word about what happened on GSC, why don't you check out his reliability? Better yet, I defy you to find a single example of me shutting OS down over an issue of faith. One. ONE. You won't be able to because it never happened. Of course you know skyrider stopped posting because he died. DIDN'T STOP YOU FROM DISHONESTLY BLAMING ME FOR HIS ABSENCE THOUGH, DID IT?

So have many of the atheists. Hell most of the moderators are gone. PAW is gone most of the time. Most of GSC did exactly what its critics said they should do: they've moved on.

Something is really wrong with you, chockfull. If you want to relitigate DWBH's departure from GSC, you are free to take it up with the site owner. But at this point after being told multiple times you continue to blame me, there is no reasoning with you. Continue to post all you want. Continue to express your evasive, criticism-immune faith all you want. I will not stop you. I didn't expect an apology from you, bur I did expect a modicum of decency. Somehow you didn't even manage THAT.

What an idiotic statement. Of course I know sky passed and that is why he no longer posts here. OS stopped due to anti Christian bias and perceived moderation in that direction whatever your story is. I can ask him if you want. Yes DWBH quit posting here over a conflict with you I’ve spoken with him outside of here. Your side of the story shows how hot the argument got. The edit to my post was unnecessary I never said he was banned. I do think I remember a temp ban but won’t stick on that point. Still in the history of this site he has posted the most relevant insider knowledge of anyone here. And you chased him off. This is fact not opinion so deal with it. I’m on up there in that list too with insider information. As is OS. And look where we are with you. The dog in a manger statement is a simile. It is describing your behavior of barking at people who believe scripture contains inspiration. You know figurative language? Oh wait you don’t know what that is. That is why you guys can’t figure out Abraham and Isaac even though TWI taught you God didn’t ask him to kill his kid. I mean Mikey would be here to point out what collateral that is in. He’s gone too. Maybe that’s my fault who knows. You are stuck on fundamentalism. This to me shows the true anti Christ nature of TWI. For a large part the cult teachings are so strong people need to depart from all of Christianity to deal with it. Deal with it however you want. This site is losing relevance and interest to me. I believe there are 2 categories of knowledge in scripture - natural reasoning knowledge and spiritual inspiration knowledge. The Bible contains many strange OT accounts. No stranger than other history books who discuss the same killing and war and atrocity. People in the OT crafted a golden calf idol after a very short time absent Moses direction. TWI leadership crafted a similar image of VPW. So peoples behavior in the NT with all the extras available supposedly from scripture don’t seem all that more advanced from the OT. Many of the remaining Christian posters have grown silent over time. Read into that what you will.

I made a deliberate decision not to reply to WordWolf's thread in doctrinal, because it's doctrinal, or here, because of the time investment that would be required to handle the material adequately. But someone somewhere should point out: the notion that Genesis correctly outlines the progress of the appearance of life on earth is... not correct. I mean, Genesis has plant life beginning before aquatic life. That is not correct. Sharks have been around longer than trees. It fails [as most would] to recognize that some animal life went from land to sea, not just sea to land. Whales evolved from land mammals. But Genesis has "the great creatures of the sea" appearing before land animals. Hard to imagine whales were not included in "great creatures of the sea." Birds. Meanwhile, descended from reptile like ancestors. So did mammals. Which means you can't say [as Genesis 1 does] that birds preceded land animals. I don't need to nitpick Genesis. But I would not subscribe to the notion that it got anything "right" about the progression of the appearance of life on earth, ESPECIALLY after taking into account that plant life showed up before the sun, moon and stars were placed in the giant dome covering the earth and keeping it from being flooded by the waters above. Would this be appropriate to post on WordWolf's thread? Maybe. But it doesn't feel very sportsmanlike.

Genesis 22 - the real story Why does God need to test a believer's faith if he knows their thoughts and what's in their heart? He had to have known what Abraham would do. (You have to ignore verse 12 though - for just like with Adam and Eve, YHWH appears to be a totally clueless God.) So, if testing was not necessary to prove Abraham's faith to God, it must have been to prove Abraham's faith to himself. Regardless of having to experience for 3 days the mental and emotional anguish from having to kill his only child, Abraham would learn just how strong his trust in God actually was. BUT, there incredibly Abraham doesn't struggle with the idea at all. Supposedly, the reason for this was because Abraham knew that God's plan was to raise Isaac from the dead! So, the rational question is why play the whole thing out? God could have said to Abraham, "Look Abe, I knew if I asked you that you would do it. Wait to go!" Then Abraham could say, "I knew, all-powerful and merciful God, that you would raise Isaac's ashes back to life. Glory be to you!" Then they could have shook hands - end of story. This whole ridiculous story was not about God and Abraham - it's a lesson to the readers. OBEY GOD NO MATTER WHAT AND YOU WILL GET YOUR FULL REWARDS AFTER YOU DIE. (See vs 16-18) One last thing, apologists will say that the purpose of the story is to foretell God sending his own only-begotten son into the world to die FOR US. My response is what's so great about God doing it when Abraham was willing to do the same thing.

Completely agree. Thank you.

let, Let, LET me repeat this... Raf wrote, "Lesson: If God tells you to kill your kid, the morally correct answer is "NO YOU BLOOMING SOCIOPATH! I WILL NOT KILL MY SON! AND IF THAT'S YOUR IDEA OF A TEST, I'D BETTER HAVE PASSED BY SAYING NO, YOU SICK THUCK!" But no, Abraham is the HERO of this story. Unless he were alive today. Someone kills their kid today and says God told them to do it, you KNOW he's psychotic, no questions asked. But it happens in the desert 5,000 years ago and you're supposed to say "What Incredible Faith!" NO!"

You know cman, I really appreciate this post of yours. Thanks

Thanks for your post Raf. It's obvious that you have spent time researching evolution which is great. There is so much information about it out there, all of which never interested me in the past. But now that I no longer believe a god exists and that the bible is not his word, what's left is how do I make sense of the natural beauty of life on this planet. Just to observe it, to interact with it and to appreciate it, for me, begs an answer to the question of how did it all come to be. I'm surprised by how emotional this topic is turning out to be. I can't explain why, so I'm calling it a night and will see what the morning brings.

what or who is god, if prelearned ideas of god are eliminated then what could it be it's fine to not believe in god, it's mostly someone else's idea of what god is that has been introduced in some sort of biased way an old Indian/survival book I read once called it "the spirit that moves through all things" there will always be the old back and forth between ideas, but really what is god and what is it that is believed or not believed, something that should be answered to yourself

I made a deliberate decision not to reply to WordWolf's thread in doctrinal, because it's doctrinal, or here, because of the time investment that would be required to handle the material adequately. But someone somewhere should point out: the notion that Genesis correctly outlines the progress of the appearance of life on earth is... not correct. I mean, Genesis has plant life beginning before sea life. That is not correct. It fails [as most would] to recognize that some animal life went from land to sea, not just sea to land. Whales evolved from land mammals. But Genesis has "the great creatures of the sea" appearing before land animals. Hard to imagine whales were not included in "great creatures of the sea." I don't need to nitpick Genesis. But I would not subscribe to the notion that it got anything "right" about the progression of the appearance of life on earth, ESPECIALLY after taking into account that plant life showed up before the sun, moon and stars were placed in the giant dome covering the earth and keeping it from being flooded by the waters above.

How do you let go of the theory of divine intelligence after always believing it was a strong argument for God being the Creator of everything? I’ve started by recently listening to two videos. In the first, Seth Andrews interviews the authors of “Evolving out of Eden: Christian Responses to Evolution” - Robert Price and Edwin A. Suominen. They get into deconstructing the works of “science-savvy theologians” who have come up with ways to combine Genesis and Genetics such as “Evolutionary Creation.” Their conclusion is that such theories don’t hold up under scientific scrutiny. In the second one, Seth Andrews interviews Abby Hafer about her book “The Not-So-Intelligent Designer: Why Evolution Explains the Human Body and Intelligent Design Does Not.” In the video, she gives a number of examples of faulty designs, one of the first being about testicles being outside of the human body while certain other animals have them inside, safe and protected. Faulty designs point to a faulty designer which would remove a perfect God from the equation. I know WordWolf has a thread in the Doctrinal: Exploring the Bible sub-forum called “What Happened in Genesis 1?” This thread is in the Atheism sub-forum for the reason I gave above. I’ll start reading “Evolving out of Eden” on Kindle tomorrow and then begin sharing some ideas as I go along. Any posts on the topic would be helpful as well.

"She's making sure she is not dreaming. See the lights of a neighbor's house. Now she's starting to rise. Take a minute to concentrate And she opens up her eyes." "Moving into the universe And she's drifting this way and that. Not touching the ground at all And she's up above the yard." "no doubt about it She isn't sure about what she's done. No time to think about what to tell them. No time to think about what she's done"

Sorry, it is not.

One of the things atheists constantly need to contend with is the constant invocation of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy. In short, this is a technique in which a member of a group denounces another member of the same group for a real or perceived difference that the atheist is somehow supposed to account for prior to making any criticism. "I understand you don't like Christianity because A, but you need to realize REAL Christians reject A." Meanwhile most don't. You do. But only because you know A is indefensible even though you wish it weren't. "You know. most Christians don't believe the Bible is inerrant." They don't? Ok, so when we complain about errors in the Bible, we're not undermining your... "Shut up about errors in the Bible. That doesn't prove anything!" Sure it does. It proves the book has errors and you can't rely on it as history, for example. "No True Christian considers the Bible an account of history." Fantastic. So we agree Exodus and the Great Flood, among other stories, never happened. "How do YOU know they never happened?" But you JUST SAID we can't trust the Bible as history. "PROVE IT'S WRONG!" There is no record of the 10 plagues or the firstborn of everyone in Egypt dying. "No True Christian believes that's history." It is IMPOSSIBLE to have a rational discussion with people who "debate" like this. It's one excuse after another and we're just standing by watching you twist yourself into a pretzel and begging you to see reason by asking "DO YOU HEAR YOURSELF?!?!" There are some people who follow a version of Christianity so unique to themselves that it's impossible for anyone to discuss it with them rationally. "My Christianity holds that Genesis didn't really happen but it talks about these stories to impart spiritual truths that, when you look really closely at them, make us better people." Except they don't. Lesson: If God tells you to kill your kid, the morally correct answer is "NO YOU BLOOMING SOCIOPATH! I WILL NOT KILL MY SON! AND IF THAT'S YOUR IDEA OF A TEST, I'D BETTER HAVE PASSED BY SAYING NO, YOU SICK THUCK!" But no, Abraham is the HERO of this story. Unless he were alive today. Someone kills their kid today and says God told them to do it, you KNOW he's psychotic, no questions asked. But it happens in the desert 5,000 years ago and you're supposed to say "What Incredible Faith!" NO! Why do we accept conduct from the characters of the Bible that we would never accept today, even those who claimed back then they were acting on God's instructions? "Ok, here's what I need you to do. You see those people over there? Kill them all. All of them. Even the kids. Kill every last one of them. Leave none alive." William Lane Craig looks at that instruction and feels sorry for the poor person who has to do all that killing. The trauma! How about having a little compassion for the women and children being killed? Nope. Not an ounce. The real victims are the killers. They were just following God's instruction. Poor things. And WE don't get to say this is morally indefensible because if we do, get this, WE are arrogant! You know...

FYI, I will be computer-free over the weekend. I'm sure you'll all struggle along without me. George