a common atheist fallacy

[cuchulain]

why need a book if he can preprogram our brains to know what he wants us to in the first place, averting millions of deaths in the argument of the 'right' god?  no, i don't believe, either.

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

3 hours ago, cuchulain said:

why need a book if he can preprogram our brains to know what he wants us to in the first place, averting millions of deaths in the argument of the 'right' god?  no, i don't believe, either.

 

 

The current system for spreading the word,  would make perfect sense, if God were evil -- or a fantasy.  If the all powerful really were in charge, and was good, and cared -- for one thing, I would expect a lot fewer books.  Only the real books would be published.  They would agree with each other and we would not need professional clergy to explain them.  We would not, for instance, have the Bhagavad Gita and the Koran.  Say what you will about contradictions within the Bible.  The World's great sacred books do not agree with each other.  

 

Or, as you say, no books at all.  If God were both real and good.  

 

 

 

 

Edited July 1, 2018 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[Dan56]

On 6/30/2018 at 8:50 AM, RevBogovac said:

OK, I'll start "chronologically"... you just rectify or acknowledge... Mkay?

 

GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness. 
GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.

 

"This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in Him there is no darkness at all." (1 John 1:5). God Himself was the light for the first three days of creation, just as He will be in the new heavens and new earth, “There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever” (Revelation 22:5).

 

The " Shechinah Glory" of the Lord is often compared to a bright light,  I believe God himself was the source of the light in Genesis 1:3, whereby; "Let there be light" in verse 3 was not a creation, but the emanation of His glory and divine presence. On day 4; "God made two great lights... And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth" (Genesis 1; 16-17). So God provided (was) the initial light in verse 3 until He created the permanent light later.

 

 

[RevBogovac]

1 hour ago, Dan56 said:

 

"This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in Him there is no darkness at all." (1 John 1:5). God Himself was the light for the first three days of creation, just as He will be in the new heavens and new earth, “There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever” (Revelation 22:5).

 

The " Shechinah Glory" of the Lord is often compared to a bright light,  I believe God himself was the source of the light in Genesis 1:3, whereby; "Let there be light" in verse 3 was not a creation, but the emanation of His glory and divine presence. On day 4; "God made two great lights... And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth" (Genesis 1; 16-17). So God provided (was) the initial light in verse 3 until He created the permanent light later.

 

 

 

Hmkay, so God was the first light and the sun was created late. Will give you that...

 

Now, for the next (couple) in this same - timeline - category:

 

GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created. 
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.

 

GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created. 
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.

 

GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created. 
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

[mererdog]

On 6/29/2018 at 2:14 PM, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

I stated that there were no objective facts about God.

I only saw you say there was no "objective evidence." Objective facts and objective evidence are not the same thing. The reason for this is that an objective fact can only be observed subjectively, and evidence exists at the intersection of fact and observation. It is both what exists and what we think about what exists, you see? As for a lack of objective facts about God, well... To speak about objective facts requires starting from the question "How does one objectively recognise the difference between what does not exist, and what exists but has not been observed?" In other words, what is proven by lack of proof?

Edited July 2, 2018 by mererdog

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

1 hour ago, mererdog said:

I only saw you say there was no "objective evidence." Objective facts and objective evidence are not the same thing. The reason for this is that an objective fact can only be observed subjectively, and evidence exists at the intersection of fact and observation. It is both what exists and what we think about what exists, you see? As for a lack of objective facts about God, well... To speak about objective facts requires starting from the question "How does one objectively recognise the difference between what does not exist, and what exists but has not been observed?" In other words, what is proven by lack of proof?

 

 

If you think that we have objective facts about God; then by all means, list them.  It's going to be a short list, since even "God exists" does not qualify.  We can't even define God.  Without common reference points, we can't even agree on what we are discussing.

 

The only objective fact we have about God is -- We have no objective facts about God.

 

 

I want to be clear here that I am not taking an Atheist stance.  Possibly, Agnostic.

God's existence is not an objective fact.

God's non-existence is not an objective fact.

We have no objective facts about God.

 

 

Edited July 2, 2018 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[mererdog]

2 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

We can't even define God.  Without common reference points, we can't even agree on what we are discussing.

Form my point of view, it looks like all you are really saying here is that you do not know what God is. You have no knowledge of God, therefore you cannot tell which definition of God, if any, is accurate. Once again, this is the "We don't know how they could do this without modern tools" argument. The "We" is presumptive, projecting personal ignorance onto the world at large.

 

Without common reference points, you cannot understand what others are saying... And yet facts exist whether or not we understand them. So common reference points can have no bearing on what is fact, merely on what is understood about fact. 

Edited July 2, 2018 by mererdog

[mererdog]

21 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

If God were both real and good. 

Speaking of lack of common reference points, what qualities makes something good? Is this objectively provable? Universally agreed upon?

Edited July 2, 2018 by mererdog

[Dan56]

10 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

 

Hmkay, so God was the first light and the sun was created late. Will give you that...

 

Now, for the next (couple) in this same - timeline - category:

 

GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created. 
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.

 

GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created. 
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.

 

GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created. 
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

 

Tree's & plants were created first, but the tree's in Genesis 2 were specific to the Garden of Eden; "The Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden" (Genesis 2:8). This was a separate occurrence from Gen 2:5, where God previously made all plants and herbs.

 

Genesis 2:19 is simply giving the details of Genesis 1:24, its a rehash of what had already been created, not a reversal of the previous order. Simply stated, mankind in general was a 6th day creation, after everything else had been made. Genesis 2 is specific to Adam, the tree's and plants already existed but were planted (not created again) in the garden where Adam was placed. Likewise, the birds and animals were not created post Adam, but Genesis 2:19 is just restating what had already been created (animals & birds), which were then brought to Adam to be named; "And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field" (Genesis 2:20).

 

The context of Genesis 2 makes it clear; "Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them... "These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens" (Genesis 2: 1&4).

 

[Dan56]

6 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

God's existence is not an objective fact.

God's non-existence is not an objective fact.

We have no objective facts about God.

 

Jesus said "My kingdom is not of this world" (John 8:36)..  With the presumption that God is Spirit and exist in another dimension, objective facts will never be obtainable knowledge to determine God.

[cuchulain]

is fact unattainable worthy of consideration?

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

1 hour ago, Dan56 said:

 

Jesus said "My kingdom is not of this world" (John 8:36)..  With the presumption that God is Spirit and exist in another dimension, objective facts will never be obtainable knowledge to determine God.

 

 

Then you agree with me?  We have no objective facts about God.  None at all.  

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

1 hour ago, cuchulain said:

is fact unattainable worthy of consideration?

 

 

Unattainable facts about God?  I think that's for each individual to decide for themselves.

 

I'm an Apatheist.  I'm tired of arguing metaphysics.  Without facts, all we have is an argument.  I don't care whether or not God exists.  Beyond love.  Beyond hate.  There is not caring.  

 

Edited July 2, 2018 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

5 hours ago, mererdog said:

Speaking of lack of common reference points, what qualities makes something good? Is this objectively provable? Universally agreed upon?

 

Your points here are all valid.  Too much for this thread.  If you care to start a separate thread, dealing with goodness issues, I will be pleased to join you.

 

 

 

 

 

[RevBogovac]

12 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

Tree's & plants were created first, but the tree's in Genesis 2 were specific to the Garden of Eden; "The Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden" (Genesis 2:8). This was a separate occurrence from Gen 2:5, where God previously made all plants and herbs.

 

Genesis 2:19 is simply giving the details of Genesis 1:24, its a rehash of what had already been created, not a reversal of the previous order. Simply stated, mankind in general was a 6th day creation, after everything else had been made. Genesis 2 is specific to Adam, the tree's and plants already existed but were planted (not created again) in the garden where Adam was placed. Likewise, the birds and animals were not created post Adam, but Genesis 2:19 is just restating what had already been created (animals & birds), which were then brought to Adam to be named; "And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field" (Genesis 2:20).

 

The context of Genesis 2 makes it clear; "Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them... "These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens" (Genesis 2: 1&4).

 

 

Hmkay, different instances of creation at different places at different time. Maybe different species... Interesting.

 

Now, let's - again - step it up a notch and discuss the creation of humans:

 

GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time. 
GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later.

 

 

 

[Dan56]

11 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

 

Hmkay, different instances of creation at different places at different time. Maybe different species... Interesting.

 

Now, let's - again - step it up a notch and discuss the creation of humans:

 

GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time. 
GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later.

 

 

There are 2 explanations, the most widely accepted is that to understand Genesis 2:4-7, one must first comprehend that this passage is the first biblical historical record of the creation of the heavens and earth, which included the Adam-man of Genesis 1:26-27. If we read this passage separately by itself, we see it: "THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens, And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul" (Genesis 2: 4-7). This passage is simply a recapitulation of Genesis chapter 1.. So,  there is one creation account with two different focuses. As such, Chapter 1 of Genesis records a general overview of Creation and Chapter 2 zeroes in on the creation of Adam and Eve.

 

But I personally lean towards the second less popular or accepted explanation (interpretation). Some Christians believe that Adam himself was an eighth day creation. God had already created men and women in Genesis 1:27, but Genesis 2:5 says; "There was not a man to till the ground". There were hunters & fishers, but no farmer to tend the ground. "God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it." (Gen 2:15). While most Christians don't ascribe to this, many believe this specific man was a separate creation for a specific purpose, of who's bloodline Messiah would come.The Hebrew "adam" means man or mankind in general (Gen 1), while "ha adam" with the article, means "the man" referring to a specific man (Adam). With the article and particle "eth ha adam", it is very emphatic and is referring to one specific man (Gen 2:7). In such a case, the animals formed in Genesis 2:19, were specific to Adam (the farmer). Genesis 1:24 refers to the creation of the "beast of the earth", while Genesis 2:19 says "God formed every beast of the field". A differentiation of God forming new domestic animals specifically for Adam.

Genesis 1:26, "And God said, Let us make man in our image". 'Adam' without the article denotes man or mankind in general, followed by plural pronoun.. The NIV says mankind.

Genesis 2:7, "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground." Here, 'man' with the particle in addition to the article "eth ha adam" is singular, referring to a specific man.

 

While most Christians reject this interpretation, it makes the most sense to me.. In either case, there are no contradictions

Edited July 3, 2018 by Dan56

[RevBogovac]

12 hours ago, Dan56 said:

[...] While most Christians reject this interpretation, it makes the most sense to me.. In either case, there are no contradictions

 

No, off course... non, whatsoever... once you "explain" it. I love books that need "explanations" to clarify things that only seem contradictory. Especially philosophical books that billions of people look to for guidance. (No pun intended, I did my Bachelor in Political Philosophy...)

 

Hmkay, next level, let's step in a bit further than "only" Genesis (although that book alone is already full of "seeming" contradictions):

 

GE 4:9 God asks Cain where his brother Able is. 
GE 4:16 Cain went away (or out) from the presence of the Lord. 

PR 15:3, JE 16:17, 23:24-25, HE 4:13 God is everywhere. He sees everything. Nothing is hidden from his view.

JE 23:23-24 A man cannot hide from God. God fills heaven and earth.

[Dan56]

14 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

Hmkay, next level, let's step in a bit further than "only" Genesis (although that book alone is already full of "seeming" contradictions):

 

GE 4:9 God asks Cain where his brother Able is. 
GE 4:16 Cain went away (or out) from the presence of the Lord. 

PR 15:3, JE 16:17, 23:24-25, HE 4:13 God is everywhere. He sees everything. Nothing is hidden from his view.

JE 23:23-24 A man cannot hide from God. God fills heaven and earth.

 

Of course God knew where Able was, He is omniscient. Imo, God was giving Cain an opportunity to be accountable, just as He did after Adam sinned; "And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?" God knew where Adam was just as He knew what Cain had done, as demonstrated in the following verse; "And He said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground" (Genesis 4:10).

Obviously, God wasn't asking because He didn't know. He was asking to give Adam, Eve, and Cain a choice. They disobeyed God, so would they also reject God, would pride cause them to lie as well? Today, God still expects us to confess our sins, not because He doesn't already know them, but because it expresses repentance. 

 

I believe Genesis 4:16 was simply referring to sending Cain away from the Tabernacle placed by God for His worship, where offerings were brought (Gen 4: 3-4). Sin separates us from God, Cain was removed from the Lords presence in the same sense Adam was thrown out of the Garden of Eden; "So He drove out the man" (Genesis 3:24). It doesn't mean Cain was invisible to God or that his whereabouts were unknown, just that Cain was separated from God's presence as part of his punishment for his horrible sin.

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

1 hour ago, Dan56 said:

 

Of course God knew where Able was, He is omniscient. Imo, God was giving Cain an opportunity to be accountable, just as He did after Adam sinned; "And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?" God knew where Adam was just as He knew what Cain had done, as demonstrated in the following verse; "And He said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground" (Genesis 4:10).

Obviously, God wasn't asking because He didn't know. He was asking to give Adam, Eve, and Cain a choice. They disobeyed God, so would they also reject God, would pride cause them to lie as well? Today, God still expects us to confess our sins, not because He doesn't already know them, but because it expresses repentance. 

 

I believe Genesis 4:16 was simply referring to sending Cain away from the Tabernacle placed by God for His worship, where offerings were brought (Gen 4: 3-4). Sin separates us from God, Cain was removed from the Lords presence in the same sense Adam was thrown out of the Garden of Eden; "So He drove out the man" (Genesis 3:24). It doesn't mean Cain was invisible to God or that his whereabouts were unknown, just that Cain was separated from God's presence as part of his punishment for his horrible sin.

 

 

If the expulsion from the Garden of Eden is a metaphor; it then follows that Adam and Eve were metaphor.  In which case, the Fall was metaphor.  The implications are serious.  Is this what you are saying?

 

If Adam and Eve and the Fall are all metaphor -- why not God?

 

 

 

 

If the Fall was not literal -- what was the sacrifice of Jesus about?  Was Jesus also a metaphor?

 

 

Edited July 4, 2018 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[RevBogovac]

12 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

Of course God knew where Able was, He is omniscient. Imo, God was giving Cain an opportunity to be accountable, just as He did after Adam sinned; "And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?" God knew where Adam was just as He knew what Cain had done, as demonstrated in the following verse; "And He said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground" (Genesis 4:10).

Obviously, God wasn't asking because He didn't know. He was asking to give Adam, Eve, and Cain a choice. They disobeyed God, so would they also reject God, would pride cause them to lie as well? Today, God still expects us to confess our sins, not because He doesn't already know them, but because it expresses repentance. 

 

I believe Genesis 4:16 was simply referring to sending Cain away from the Tabernacle placed by God for His worship, where offerings were brought (Gen 4: 3-4). Sin separates us from God, Cain was removed from the Lords presence in the same sense Adam was thrown out of the Garden of Eden; "So He drove out the man" (Genesis 3:24). It doesn't mean Cain was invisible to God or that his whereabouts were unknown, just that Cain was separated from God's presence as part of his punishment for his horrible sin.

 

 

Of course... Obviously... Speaking of God:

 

GE 1:31 God was pleased with his creation. 
GE 6:5-6 God was not pleased with his creation.