Evolution of God

[Sophus]

Thanks for the response videos Recusant!  :raised:  "Hidden polytheism" is false whilst polytheistic roots are not?

I don't see a problem with the Israelites graudally coming to realize that their God is aboslutely the only God. Not sure how this contradicts the Christian faith at all. It contradicts protestant biblical fundamentalism, which is what you seem to always argue against (regardless of what tradition your *actually* arguing against!)

Considering Christianity is many things, contradictory perhaps not. But all the more fatuous, yes. For being "God breathed" the Bible struggles more to achieve perfection than his creation. It's interesting that he took so long to reveal himself as the only God, and to only certain group of people too.

[Achronos]

 "Hidden polytheism" is false whilst polytheistic roots are not?

Both are oversimplifications. What happened to your scientific, rational mind? Why the false dichotomy?

Considering Christianity is many things, contradictory perhaps not. But all the more fatuous, yes. For being "God breathed" the Bible struggles more to achieve perfection than his creation. It's interesting that he took so long to reveal himself as the only God, and to only certain group of people too.

The Bible is not our God, nor was it Maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

You can keep attacking the Bible and I'll keep saying it makes no difference.

[TheJackel]

The Bible is not our God, nor was it Maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

Is that the Nothing GOD?

[Sophus]

 "Hidden polytheism" is false whilst polytheistic roots are not?

Both are oversimplifications. What happened to your scientific, rational mind? Why the false dichotomy?

If the early text included in the Bible contained polytheism but no longer does.... voila!
Notice the original statement was about the Bible.

The Bible is not our God, nor was it Maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

You can keep attacking the Bible and I'll keep saying it makes no difference.

So you're not going to explain why an all-powerful being has successfully created a universe but failed to inspire a prompt book notifying us all about his presence? Stop deflecting to get out of explaining anything. It concerns him if it's "God breathed". Seeing as he is the maker of all things, I guess it concerns him regardless.

[Achronos]

If the early text included in the Bible contained polytheism but no longer does.... voila!
Notice the original statement was about the Bible.

You still do NOT "get it"...I am not a Biblical inerrantist. I do not understand the Scriptures in the same way a Protestant Fundamentalist does. So you're question makes no sense. It's like asking a Muslim "explain to me why you accept the Trinity!"

It's an incoherent question. Orthodoxy does not "need the Bible", you are once again, as always misrepresenting my religion, then arguing against the misrepresentation. I have no problem with you disagreeing with my faith or any other faith but stop misrepresenting what it is Orthodoxy believes and does not believe.

Seeing as he is the maker of all things, I guess it concerns him regardless.

Logical fallacy. You assume that if there is a God, he must behave exactly how you think he should behave. He doesn't behave the way you think he should, and thus you assume God cannot exist. That's not just had argument, it's not an argument at all. Just because the leader of a a particular country doesn't do what I want, doesn't mean the leader is a "bad person" or "evil", it simply means he didn't meet my expectations. Nothing more.

[TheJackel]

It's an incoherent question. Orthodoxy does not "need the Bible", you are once again, as always misrepresenting my religion, then arguing against the misrepresentation. I have no problem with you disagreeing with my faith or any other faith but stop misrepresenting what it is Orthodoxy believes and does not believe.

So many views on the concept of religion and GOD that it's just ridiculous.

Logical fallacy. You assume that if there is a God, he must behave exactly how you think he should behave. He doesn't behave the way you think he should, and thus you assume God cannot exist. That's not just had argument, it's not an argument at all. Just because the leader of a a particular country doesn't do what I want, doesn't mean the leader is a "bad person" or "evil", it simply means he didn't meet my expectations. Nothing more.

his argument there didn't say anything about behavior.. Irregardless, your argument here keeps stumbling over a simple little fact that you are not grasping. GOD are sheer concepts of opinion. Concepts of opinion only have worth to those whom have the opinion. Otherwise they are worthless in a world of opinions. It pretty much nullifies the entire argument even if something existed to which you would consider a GOD. Some people worship the Cow, and yet I could give a rats ass because I see it as a hamburger with catchup, pickles, and lettuce.

[Sophus]

If the early text included in the Bible contained polytheism but no longer does.... voila!
Notice the original statement was about the Bible.

You still do NOT "get it"...I am not a Biblical inerrantist. I do not understand the Scriptures in the same way a Protestant Fundamentalist does. So you're question makes no sense. It's like asking a Muslim "explain to me why you accept the Trinity!"

It's an incoherent question. Orthodoxy does not "need the Bible", you are once again, as always misrepresenting my religion, then arguing against the misrepresentation. I have no problem with you disagreeing with my faith or any other faith but stop misrepresenting what it is Orthodoxy believes and does not believe.

What exactly is this a response to? This wasn't about your faith. It's about the history of the Bible. Facts. Not interpretation.

Logical fallacy. You assume that if there is a God, he must behave exactly how you think he should behave. He doesn't behave the way you think he should, and thus you assume God cannot exist.

No, actually the reason why he doesn't exist is because there is no evidence in favor of it and heaps of evidence to the contrary. The fact that he doesn't behave how an omnipotent, omniscient, all-loving being would is just a flaw in the storyline.

That's not just had argument, it's not an argument at all. Just because the leader of a a particular country doesn't do what I want, doesn't mean the leader is a "bad person" or "evil", it simply means he didn't meet my expectations. Nothing more.

Dear God, that sounds oddly nihilistic. What is this moral relativism? Aren't you arguing for an objective morality from a God?

[wildfire_emissary]

I posted the video in the OP in my facebook. Some nitwit student commented: "This is not a proof of God's nonexistence." I said she's right, but unfortunately the video does not intend to prove god's nonexistence. Why can't she just watch and understand first before jumping the gun?

[Sophus]

I posted the video in the OP in my facebook. Some nitwit student commented: "This is not a proof of God's nonexistence." I said she's right, but unfortunately the video does not intend to prove god's nonexistence. Why can't she just watch and understand first before jumping the gun?

Suddenly she's keen on proof?  

[wildfire_emissary]

Man oh man! Now she's asking what is my evidence that I have evidence.

[LegendarySandwich]

Man oh man! Now she's asking what is my evidence that I have evidence.

Just in case, you might also want to bring evidence that you have evidence that you have evidence along with you, if she asks for that.

[KDbeads]

Man oh man! Now she's asking what is my evidence that I have evidence. roflol

[xSilverPhinx]

Man oh man! Now she's asking what is my evidence that I have evidence. :blink:

Now the word 'evidence' has lost all meaning. But when seeing the religious side of view as often as I do, one gets used to that.

[xSilverPhinx]

I posted the video in the OP in my facebook. Some nitwit student commented: "This is not a proof of God's nonexistence." I said she's right, but unfortunately the video does not intend to prove god's nonexistence. Why can't she just watch and understand first before jumping the gun?

Suddenly she's keen on proof?  

Probably doesn't even matter. Some think that scientific/objective proof is just as dependant on personal opinion as their "proofs" of the bible's veracity, their personal relationships with gods etc.

Carbon dating for instance, can be said to work when it approximates Turin's shroud to the time when Jesus died. That they accept.