Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Unanswered Bible Questions Author: Bruno Dosca Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Gen 6:6-7 vs. allmighty and omniscient | Gen 6:6 | Bruno Dosca | 220822 | ||
Hello, I see many problems trying to undestand this passage: Gen 6:6-7 How can this be true if God is omniscient and almighty? I see His regret totally incompatible with being omniscient and almighty at the same time. I would be very happy to read an answer. Thanks. |
||||||
2 | Reply to Mr. Doc | Gen 6:6 | Bruno Dosca | 220826 | ||
Thanks a lot, Doc. But, his later decision of make the flood was not symbolic. This shows a real "change of mind". Anyway, how do you know which verses take literally and which others take as symbolic? I mean, there are parts of the Old Testament which are really heavy and have worried me. Num 15:32-36 for example. You think that's symbolic or literally true? |
||||||
3 | Good and Evil logycally ANTERIOR to God! | Gen 6:6 | Bruno Dosca | 221198 | ||
Dear Doc, thanks for your answer and sorry for mu delay I've been really bussy those las weeks. About your sentence "we do not evaluate God by what He does, we evaluate what He does, by who He is" I see a problem with that. I mean with the relation between God and "Good and Evil". There are two options: Option 1: God decides what is Good and what is Evil so it depends on His, lets say "caprice". Option 2: God sees what is Good and Evil and supports the Good. But in that case Good and Evil are logycally ANTERIOR to God! Reading your comment it seems to me that you are a supporter od the Option 1. Am I right? |
||||||
4 | answer step by step | Gen 6:6 | Bruno Dosca | 221269 | ||
Thanks Beja for your answer. I will try to answer step by step, With your comments about good or bad/poor questions I clearly see where our disagreement comes from. It seems to me that you have 100 per cent (not 99.99 per cent but 100 per cent) confidence in the truth of the Bible. Well, I am trying to put first the logical consistency of arguments. Let's say that I put first the rule: If something is not logically consistent it can not be True. And indeed a second rule: If something is logically consistent may (not must) be True. I don't see a problem in questioning the Bible because if it is True it will stand upright without problem. In other words, I would feel very dishonest if I were deflecting my attention every time I see a problem, as it would happen if I follow your rule of not to "have some sort of unbiblical thinking". Well, that is my reply to your first post. I will continue my reply after the second part of your post. |
||||||
5 | step by step - PART 2 | Gen 6:6 | Bruno Dosca | 221270 | ||
... to continue my reply... I can't help being amazed at your statements. Do you realize that by saying "it doesn't flow from abstract morality but the honoring or belittling of God" you give the impression of accepting my "Option 1", which by the way, you say not to accept? I mean, it seems to me that you are saying that the "abstract morality" is not True and Real. Am I right? My reasons for not to kill or to rape are that I don't want to harm anybody. For all this things would harm me a lot and I assume that most other beings would be harmed in similar way. And all this pain would destroy one of the most precious thing we have: The joy of being alive, the incredible privilege of existence and sharing with other beings this wonderful fact. Also is not true that God excludes man from the killings. There are many counterexamples, but one of the most gratuitous is Num 15:32-36. By the way it is terribly easy to find contradictions in your reasons to obey governments. In your case just think in a non-Christian government. If you were living in Iran, would you obey the ayatollah? PS: Let me say for completeness that I think there is an "Option 3" which is the logical simultaneousness of God and the Good and Evil thing. Then I identify the hole discussion with being about Goodness and Evilness. But most people identifies God with something more than that. A God-being. |
||||||
6 | questioning | Gen 6:6 | Bruno Dosca | 221282 | ||
Dear Beja, Thanks for your post. I don't think questioning of the Bible is a "youthful questioning" in me. Leaving apart that this questioning have been more and more intense with time, I would like to say that is also a matter of putting things in context. I'm trying to seek Truth and in the process I find that I have to question everything and use reason. It is during this process that, to see thing in perspective, I should look to the Bible from the same point of view that I look to Koran, Tao-Te-Ching, Veda and the other holy books of the many religions of the world. I think it is very easy to understand why a Christian don't accept all this books and only accepts the Bible, while all the followers of the other religions do the same in respect to their holy books. Most of this people thinks they are right while the others are wrong. "How lucky I am for having been born in the true religion", many of them probably think. This is why I put first reason and logical consistence in order to avoid being lost in the labyrinth of the unknown. And to answer directly your question, yes I disagree with some things said in the Bible. There are many factual mistakes and contradictions, mostly in the OT but also in the NT. And many of them are just inescapable. I can point you some of them if you wish. About my three options I don't understand how can you be "fundamentally opposed to either of your options" as they cover the hole spectrum of possibilities (anterior, posterior, simultaneous). About government thing I just point that we no longer stone to death young people for disobeying their parents or for other reasons. Which is obviously a progress in our understanding of justice from the bronze age, the time when the OT was written. |
||||||