why I don't believe in the Bible?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MattG

If there were a god, and if that god was the ultimate authority, then why fool around with the whole son from a virgin mother sacrifice thing? This ultimate authority could instead just wave his hand over the world and proclaim that all is cool in the land.

---

Ah...but there's the problem. With God, He must be true to His character. There must be judgment for those things that are wrong. He sent His Son, who was without sin, to take the punishment for sin. Christ is only the Son in respects to being the heir to the throne. There are many layers in a complex plan, one should only take a layer at a time. As far as the virgin part goes, Mary was a virgin who had a baby. This was to be proof that Christ's birth was of divine nature. It was merely a sign. The Catholic church has made the virgin into a god of their own. She was never meant to be more than a means to make God into a man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

He sent His Son, who was without sin, to take the punishment for sin.

---

Why? How does that absolve anyone else of their deeds?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

You'd have to explain the manner in which you think that they are manipulated. It seems that you already of a chip on your shoulder concerning males, so maybe you don't like the patriarchal system which is demonstrated. If that's the case, then you should be rejecting all historical accounts. As far as saving mankind goes, you need to understand that the physical world is merely a temporary measure toward a permanent spiritual setting. The saving is of a spiritual nature.

---

I have no chip against any man actually, I much prefer them to women I have you to know.
The Bible you cannot deny is patriarchal which I dislike not because it is male orientated, but it is one sided.
I would have said the same if it was women sided only.
I dislike the word father used in a religious context for the reason I stated above.
I also dislike the father that God is refered as a man only.
I would have prefered if God was refered as both because that for me is FAIR.
I do not believe Jesus was cricified in the same way that he is said to have died for our sins.
I most dilike the fact that I am told that he was resurected.
I have not seen any of these'subfacts' and therefore I cannot possibly believe in them.
I cannot possibly understand that some of us do believe in these 'madeup 'stories.
I also cringe to think that Mary was avirign and had Jesus as a son and God is refered to as the father this is almost sick it churns my stomach.
There is almost a feeling of 'contextualised institutionalisedIncest' that is abherent to bear.
This how I feel and of course I respect and admire your beliefs and you are to think differently from me.
I am a reader and therefore I stand the right to critique the bible as I see fit and this what I am doing.

You do have a chip, or else you wouldn't have posted MALe pointed to males as being bad. No point in denying it now. You must also have a predetermination that there is no supernatural. If that is the case, then you can believe what you want. It seems that you don't have as much problem with the Bible as you do people believing in the Bible. So be it... There are believers in this world, and you're just going to have to accept that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

You do have a chip, or else you wouldn't have posted MALe pointed to males as being bad. No point in denying it now. You must also have a predetermination that there is no supernatural. If that is the case, then you can believe what you want. It seems that you don't have as much problem with the Bible as you do people believing in the Bible. So be it... There are believers in this world, and you're just going to have to accept that.

---

Ok.
I am not denying anything.
I am not saying that man are bad . These are not my word.
I am pointing out what I noticed in the word MALE.
This word is latin derivative and I could not help but notice its other meaning in French
I speak French, in the same way that the word SALE means dirty in French.
These are facts.
They mean other things in French.
I could also point that BIENVENUe means welcome in French.
Does that mean I am welcoming you?
No. I am just pointing it out.
I believe what I want in the same way that you do.
By telling you what the word mean I am actually drawing your attention to what it means to others in another language.
This surely is a good thing and not a bad one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MattG

Why? How does that absolve anyone else of their deeds?

---

As a substitute. The entire sacrificial system of the Old Testament was God teaching and preparing his people. Teaching them that sin required death, a payment in blood. Teaching them that a substitution is permitted so that God can punish sin with justice and yet forgive his people in mercy.

If your work had a strict set of rules they would require behavior A from you and prescribe punishment B in case of failure. Christ, as a Substitute, provided the required behavior (sinlessness) and did so in our place. Christ, as a substitute, endured the prescribed punishment (hell) and did so in our place. God the Father was pleased, indeed, the author of this plan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by togre

As a substitute. The entire sacrificial system of the Old Testament was God teaching and preparing his people. Teaching them that sin required death, a payment in blood. Teaching them that a substitution is permitted so that God can punish sin with justice and yet forgive his people in mercy.

If your work had a strict set of rules they would require behavior A from you and prescribe punishment B in case of failure. Christ, as a Substitute, provided the required behavior (sinlessness) and did so in our place. Christ, as a substitute, endured the prescribed punishment (hell) and did so in our place. God the Father was pleased, indeed, the author of this plan.

---

That is a great explanation, but I wonder if it will be accepted here.

I was taught philosophy from Grade Two - before the end of the year I was kicked out of Sunday School for asking too many questions (well they put the word on my Mum not to bring me because I was too disruptive). She was angry with them and me because she looked forward to her few hours break which had suddenly vanished. But then she foisted me on Grandma - same thing happened, and I went through all the Aunts and Uncles until everyone finally gave up. (I was given a bike to amuse myself with, but I think they really hoped I'd have an accident)

I actually enjoyed Sunday School, at least what I remember of it - perhaps it was because it was rare compared to normal school which was every day, but Pete, Robert, Bruce, and Martin I just wasn't allowed to see anymore (even out of Sunday School) which I didn't think was fair.

I've thought of going back to finish my education, but I think I might be a bit too old now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cacian

Tailored is the word.
how is it tailored to hold believes if I am saying that I do not believe a word the bible says?

---

I know what you are saying. You don't get what I am saying. The bible is not a book of things to know. It is a book of things to believe or disbelieve. You disbelieve. The only other thing you can do with the bible is believe.
You can learn the difference between what you believe, what you disbelieve, and what you know. You might be confusing the three.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cacian

stories reminds me of Greek mythology

---

You mean Greek mythology reminds you of the stories, assuming you're talking about the Old-Testament writings, the large majority of which antedate Homer and Hesiod. If you're talking about the New-Testament writings, then I don't see the parity. I love both, but they have very different tenors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MystyrMystyry

I was taught philosophy from Grade Two

---

That's great. :) I wish I was the same. Grade two's kind of early though. What sort of philosophy would you learn at that age?

If I have kids - doubtful - I'm going to get them started on classical logic as soon as they're ready, probably around the age of twelve. Logic, it seems to me, is propaedeutic to philosophy generally.