I was wishing to post a comment but could not find a topic to which it specifically belongs - it is relavent to almost all of the topics on your site. I'm not sure if this is the best way to address the question/comment to you and if it's not, please tell me the best way to do it from now on.
Anyhow, to the point:
I was reading through many of the posts on various topics and I noted that several times, you (among many others - you are simply the easiest to directly reach) stated that the Bible was written by men. Specifically I saw this comment in a long transaction between you and "biblicalwitness" concerning the "Plea to TRUE Chritians". Anyways, what i would like to know is:
What is your basis for stating that the bible was written by men?
What proof can you offer that the Bible was written only by men?
What is your proof that the Bible was NOT inspired by God and written through men?
And why do you base your beliefs of the origins of the Bible on this proof?
If I worded anything too confusingly or nosensically, sorry, please let me know and I will do my best to rephrase it.
Again, I apologize if this is not the best way to ask you this question - please tell me if I need to do otherwise (like find a forum to post it on, etc.). Feel free to post this as a forum topic or what-have-you, I am not necessarily directing this question at just you. Actually I am quite curious to see how anyone responds to this topic.
Thanks in advance for any response,
JB
These letters were published between January 2001 and February 2010. To view recent posts, go to The Main Blog at ExChristian.Net
220 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 220 of 220To dave8,
I have stated many times on this site that I do not know. And like I said yesterday, I concede the point that I can't say I "KNOW". There are many things that I do not know. Did God heals Aaron's heart. Based on the evidence I say yes. Can I say that I "KNOW" that? Nope. But I do believe it, in all it's illogical glory.
And I can't prove by the evidence alone that his heart was healed by God. But I never claimed that that would be proof of His existance. I first mentioned it as something I witnessed and "beleived" was God's work. And I still do believe it. It was the others who wanted to see it, I believe, to only discredit it. I am not playing the victim here but I feel that would have been the case.
Dave Poole
David Poole(from post 5/5/06 9:24 PM):
"I have stated many times on this site that I do not know. And like I said yesterday, I conceded the point that I can't say I 'KNOW'."
David Poole(from post 5/4/06 5:59 PM):
"How do I know it was God and not some other deity? I know, what else can I say?"
To boomslang,
That statement is true, but according the statment will not hold up to Dave8's criteria for "KNOWING". I still believe 100% that it was and is The Lord
Dave Poole
That's good. Okay, then can we finally conclude, once and for all, that just because David Poole believes on his "Lord", the Christian Deity "Jesus Christ", that it doesn't mean Christianity's absolutely true; that he could be worshiping the wrong deity; that he takes what he believes on "faith" only; that so-called "miracles" could be improbable coincidences; that evolution is both theory AND fact; that people's lives can have meaning without a "God"?
If we CAN conclude these things, then why are you here? If we can't conclude these things--STILL, then you're wasting everyone's time, including your own.
Let's have it.
"I still believe..."
I think this whole discussion has come down to this: you believe.
And you are entitled to that position.
To boomslang:
If we CAN conclude these things, then why are you here? If we can't conclude these things--STILL, then you're wasting everyone's time, including your own.
Ultimately this whole site is a waste of time. It's just people talking about there opinions. Nothing productive occurs here at all. Not that there is anything wrong with that. People do need support when they've endured difficulties. But all we do is talk. It's entertainment and nothing more. I come here because things have been slow at work.
TO Sout2003:
YOu said: We are at liberty to post our “coming out so to speak” and it is not your place to spout "That’s the risk you run by posting your life on the internet."
You are at liberty to post your experiences, you are also at liberty to hear from others who may agree or disagree with you.
You asked: How about your life David, honestly, who is behind that curtain? Are you hiding behind your portentous religious club? Does your religion tell you to suppress who you are and sweep shit under the carpets, then talk to yourself and read a book and all will be well? Does it also teach you to hold on to some reputation for a counterfeit reward and live an unnatural life? Why would anyone adhere to such claptrap? (These are all questions).
No. Nothing to hide here. Nothing counterfeit. (These are all answers.)
Dave Poole
David Poole: "Ultimately this whole site is a waste of time. It's just people talking about there opinions."
However, opinions become facts when corroborated by a number of people, and verification efforts can lend predictable results consistently. Now, someones' opinion may not be consistent with logic, nor may it be testable to a great degree. However, there does exist information that is predictable, and worthy of understanding. You may not want to believe that because it conflicts with your immediate presupposition of a "god" being the mover and shaker behind the curtain of reality.
David Poole: "Nothing productive occurs here at all."
Absolutely true, for those who are not capable of being open minded and flexible enough to spot consistencies in information. For those, who are going to hold onto a belief based on "faith", this site holds nothing for them, except pity - at least by me.
David Poole: "Not that there is anything wrong with that. People do need support when they've endured difficulties."
The best way to move through conflict, is to understand the conflict, and the basic underlying principles that failed. In religion, predominately, one may allow themselves to be abused because they are trained to accept themselves as downfallen by sin, without the ability to become whole again. Uh, this is why some children get molested and don't report the case there David, they are made to feel as the abuse is warranted because they are sinful and deserving. Just because you may not have bought off on the whole idea of original sin, and the religiously touted "Fact" that everyone falls short and is deserving of nothing, doesn't mean that the message isn't taken literally by many others.
David Poole: "But all we do is talk."
And to you, talking is nothing I suppose, but... if you had an education you'd realize that information is the key to your life. Can you name something in your life, "anything" that doesn't contain information. No. So, ignorantly, by stating that just "talking" has little merit, its foundations on information, is the basis for your very being, hence, one might speculate on the informational worth of your "life", as you make that comment in a semi-nihilist fashion.
David Poole: "It's entertainment and nothing more. I come here because things have been slow at work."
I come here, because some people have no idea what type information is valid for specific functions in life. To watch them make posts, without having that information, is purely entertaining.
To David Poole,
You accepted my challenge to you earlier. Have you asked god about it? I'm about to extend the same challenge to another visitor who claims to regularly have conversations with god. Should be interesting, no?
To Jim Avro,
I have prayed about this. The second day I received a passage from Acts 16:16. I am not sure if The Lord "gave" me this or if I just remembered it, but it sprang to mind quite fast. Anyway, the passage tells of how Paul and his posse came upon a woman with a spirit of divination. Paul then proceeded to cast it out, making the men who were profiting from the woman very angry. The woman was making money reading people's minds and revealing things to them that only they would know. Sounds like our situation here. Anyway, this left me with more questions than answers. Paul cast this spirit out but I am not sure why. Divinity is not a fruit of the Spirit so that may be why he cast it out. But Paul also had a tendency to be a bit of a "pill" and may have just had a "bug stuck you know where". But to conclude this rant, no I have not "heard" anything. The first day I started praying I got an image but I am pretty sure it was just my imagination. I will keep praying and let you know, but so far, Nothing.
Dave Poole
David Poole said "But to conclude this rant, no I have not 'heard' anything. The first day I started praying I got an image but I am pretty sure it was just my imagination. I will keep praying and let you know, but so far, Nothing."
Well, David, that was the most honest reply I ever received to such a challenge. You get some points for that. It does raise an interesting question, however. How do you distinguish between your imagination and messages from god? Of course, it is my strong suspicion that it's always the former, and never the latter. The only way I could hope to distinguish the two is via content--hence my challenge. But how do *you* think that you can tell the difference?
To Jim Avro,
Another tough question. I guess you have to use good judgment in deciphering that. When your wife tells you that she loves you how do you know she means it? How do you know she is not just saying it? You could argue that you can tell she is sincere based on her actions. But how do you know she is not pretending? There comes a point where you have to take it on faith, when you have to believe it as opposed to knowing it.
How do I know the difference between God and my imagination? There are lots of times when I am not sure, and I always chalk those up to imagination. And there have been times when the experience was so undeniably real and significant that it had to be God, or maybe it would be better to say that it could not be my imagination. I know that many out there would say it is foolish to claim those experiences as God if you can not say with 100% assuredness that it is God. But based on the events that occurred and the intensity of those events there is no doubt in my mind that it was indeed God. I do realize that this is only significant to me but that is the best I can answer your question.
Finally, I will continue to pray in regards to your request (I have to admit that the last few days I have been a little preoccupied with some other events and have slacked off a bit in regards to your prayer request). Please write it down or take whatever measures are necessary to ensure you do not forget what your vision was. I will let you know what, if anything, I hear.
Dave Poole
David,
Your analogy is not apt. You liken the problem of discriminating between imagination and communications from god with determining whether a speech act of a person (my wife, in this case) is an accurate description of the person's cognitive state (whether she loves me). I think it's a poor analogy because the first is a problem of determining the *origin* of a message, and the second is a problem of determining the *accuracy* of a message. Note that you did not liken your problem to how I might determine whether something I heard originated in my imagination or from my wife; i.e. distinguishing between an auditory hallucination and the real thing. But that would be a closer analogy, would it not? I think you did not go that route because I would have many options available to me that you would not. I could simply ask my wife if she had said something. I could ask others if they overheard. I could ask my wife to repeat what she said in the presence of another observer. So, clearly, you are dealing with something that does not have ANY of the characteristics of physical communication that we enjoy with real people.
But even your strained analogy does not really work in your favor. How do I know that my wife means it when she says she loves me? It's *not* purely a matter of faith, as you suggest. People can and do profess "love" all the time and do not mean it, or intend something far less substantial by it than I would. Therefore, those words in isolation do not mean much. What matters is a long history of actions that are consistent with those words. It is therefore a far more empirical thing than most people are willing to admit.
In summary, I can verify both the *origin* and the *content* of messages from a real person in ways that you apparently cannot from your god. But, I can hear you say, you actually can do the latter--you *can* attest to a long history of behaviors that are consistent with the message, for god behaves according to his word. (Am I close?) But I don't buy that, because that history of behaviors rests upon the very same murky foundation as the communication itself--e.g. you have *faith* that certain occurrences were a direct result of god involvement. You cannot verify a single one. (Believers often point to the extreme improbability of specific events as "proof" that it required divine intervention. However, no such claim that I have examined has held up to scrutiny--most fail because of faulty statistical inferences.)
As for the scene I imagined, I will not forget it. I've used the same scene for quite a while now. For the sake of keeping this experiment "pure", it's important that I do not write it down or tell anyone. This actually raises an interesting question, however. Suppose you say "God told me you were imagining X", and I say "Nope, not even close." How would *you* know whether I was telling the truth? Well, there's a relatively high-tech way I could set up the experiment to achieve that end as well, but I won't pursue that until it gets to that level. Thus far nobody has even hazarded a guess.
To Jim Avro,
I understand your point. Talk to you later when I hear (or don't hear) something.
Dave Poole
Reincarnation has found a home back where it belongs- in Christianity of course!
Don't let the Bible bashers fool you. They've built a house of cards on the shifting sands. And all I've got to worry about is mixed metaphors.
Dave Poole 05/15 at 3:23 said "I am not sure if the Lord 'gave' me this or if I just remembered it..."
Not sure? Hmmm. Why aren't you sure? This is why we don't believe christians here.
To Slingshot,
Dave Poole 05/15 at 3:23 said "I am not sure if the Lord 'gave' me this or if I just remembered it..."
Not sure? Hmmm. Why aren't you sure? This is why we don't believe Christians here.
That is right, I was not sure. And I said that. I can admit when I am not sure of things; I can admit when I don’t “KNOW”. Can you? So many non-believers say they are enlightened; that they won’t be fooled. “We need proof”. “We only believe what we can see”. “We put their faith in ‘SCIENCE’”. It wasn’t too long ago when people SAW a flat horizon and assumed the world was flat. It wasn’t too long ago when people SAW the sun move across the sky and assumed that the sun revolved around the earth. It wasn’t too long ago that people thought meat turned into flies because that is what they SAW.
“No, no, David. It’s different”. “We know so much more now”.
Do we? Are we so much more enlightened? Or have we just found new things to misunderstand? Will people 200 years from now be laughing at what we “KNEW” the same way we look back at our predecessors and scoff at what they “KNEW”?
Wait. That was a silly question. I forgot that non-believers knew everything. My bad.
Dave Poole
Please forgive that last line in the previous post. It was less than productive. I was weak.
Dave Poole
You don't get it, Dave. When you say that you are not sure, I can't help but wonder if you really have a "relationship with Christ." If you did, then it seems to me that you would know his voice from that of your own mind.
I know this post is old, but I have to add some too.
If the Bible was inspired by God, HE would have known that earth is round before man did, and not have "four corners". He would also have known that the man jesus met who had epilepsy- was not possessed by demons. These are just 2 things out of the multitude of things the "inspired word of God" didn't inspire man to write down. Or did God not know these things either? LOL!
The burden of proof lies with the people that claim the Bible was inspired by God.
If i said the Bible was written by a bunch of witches, i would have to somehow proof my statement. If i can't proof it then my statement would be a 'claim', not fact.
Nobody can proof that the Bible was somehow inspired or dictated by God 'himself' (why does God appear to be 'male' in the Bible?)...to me it's also quite telling that MEN wrote the Bible.
Not a single woman author to be found anywhere. Was God sexiest?
Ahhh....just one more human emotion among many attached to the biblical God...
Post a Comment