Comments on: My Ways Are Not Your Ways http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html NIGHTTIME IS FOR DREAMING. DAYLIGHT IS FOR ACTION. Mon, 23 Jan 2012 12:09:52 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: OMGF http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-65070 OMGF Fri, 15 Apr 2011 22:35:27 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-65070 John, The empirical world presents standards for us to use. The rules of logic are such because they agree with what we actually observe in the world. For instance, we know that simply because a majority agrees on something doesn't mean it is right. How do we know this? Because we have seen cases where a majority of people said X and we found X to be empirically wrong (like the sun moving about the Earth, for instance). So, whose standard should we use? The empirical one that is verifiable and repeatable. But, you've walked right into a trap yourself. You can't very well hold that you are able to judge god's goodness/logic/morality/etc, and then turn around and claim that we are in no position to judge god. You can't have it both ways. Lastly, atheism is not a faith position. Rejecting your faith position does not necessarily mean that I have adopted my own faith position. Atheism is a non-faith position. John,
The empirical world presents standards for us to use. The rules of logic are such because they agree with what we actually observe in the world. For instance, we know that simply because a majority agrees on something doesn't mean it is right. How do we know this? Because we have seen cases where a majority of people said X and we found X to be empirically wrong (like the sun moving about the Earth, for instance). So, whose standard should we use? The empirical one that is verifiable and repeatable.

But, you've walked right into a trap yourself. You can't very well hold that you are able to judge god's goodness/logic/morality/etc, and then turn around and claim that we are in no position to judge god. You can't have it both ways.

Lastly, atheism is not a faith position. Rejecting your faith position does not necessarily mean that I have adopted my own faith position. Atheism is a non-faith position.

]]> By: Steve Bowen http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-65044 Steve Bowen Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:42:05 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-65044 Thread necromancy much... But John you are falling into the same pattern Christians alway seem to find when trying to make sense of their religion's inconsistancies. On one hand you want your god to be understandable and "human" as depicted in most of the bible and derive moral lessons from his behaviour, but when that behaviour doesn't suit he suddenly become ineffable and beyond our puny understanding. The atheist position of course does not require this level of mental gymnastics. Even if I was to concede that atheism or materialism were faith positions (I don't)the fact that there is a lot about the universe we don't know doesn't negate that the bits we do know seem to function perfectly well without supernatural intervention. It is not faith, but rational extrapolation to assume that will continue to be the case as we learn more Thread necromancy much...
But John you are falling into the same pattern Christians alway seem to find when trying to make sense of their religion's inconsistancies. On one hand you want your god to be understandable and "human" as depicted in most of the bible and derive moral lessons from his behaviour, but when that behaviour doesn't suit he suddenly become ineffable and beyond our puny understanding. The atheist position of course does not require this level of mental gymnastics. Even if I was to concede that atheism or materialism were faith positions (I don't)the fact that there is a lot about the universe we don't know doesn't negate that the bits we do know seem to function perfectly well without supernatural intervention. It is not faith, but rational extrapolation to assume that will continue to be the case as we learn more

]]> By: John http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-65019 John Thu, 14 Apr 2011 13:58:49 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-65019 As a devout believer in Christ, I admit, this is perhaps the best argument (in the article about Isa 55: 8-9) that I have come across. And I confess, I have struggled with the very same questions myself. As beievers, we're taught to understand these questions and dilemmas as "the testing of your (our faith), more precious than gold". We are warned not to abandon the faith (on fear of punishment, chastening, or for some Christians who believe salvation once given by God, can be revoked by Him, being sent to hell). So, we are in effect, told to abandon our minds, "doubt our doubts" and still affirm that He is GOOD, that no matter how "irrational" God may appear - by either His delay to bring about the promises He has made in His word about answered prayer, or His refusal to answer our prayers (how many believers have prayed for a healing for sick loved one, have stood on the promises of God relative to such and still saw that loved one or friend die from that sickness? Yet the promise of James is "The LORD WILL raise them up" (when the Elders of the church have prayed "the prayer of faith" and "anointed in the name of the Lord" etc). Jesus promised, "I tell you the truth, if two of you shall agree on earth concerning anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of My Father in heaven"...yet, it we're honest, how many debout believers can attest to lack of answered prayer? These questions do indeed trouble me, I admit. Yet I would offer this for consideration: One person commented My answer and question to such a claim would be this: If your OWN standard of intelligence and sanity differs from say, an Adolf Hitler, or Jeffery Dhamer, then whose specific STANDARD of intelligence is worthy to judge whether God is acting in a "rational" way? Since there is no universally accepted STANDARD by which all other sentiment, understanding or belief is to be judged, then in point of fact, no human intelligence would or even could judge God. The belief in atheism (and I admit, I have wrestled with many of these questions myself), ultimately, seeks to make sense of life and the world we live in, according to it's OWN understanding or opinion on the nature of life, morality (however it be defined by any culture at any time). Who made the Athiest ALL-KNOWING? Who said they know enough about everything there is to know in the universe (which is pretty big), and that they are competent therefore to judge the claims of God as being "illogical"? Is it just me, or is the irony present in such a fantatic and inconsistent claim, hidden from they themselves? To assume we could understand EVERYTHING about a being who transcends our finite and mortal existence, is, IMO, arrogant folly. A God who is no bigger than any of those who made a comment in favour of Atheism, would be, for myself, not worthy of my respect or reverence....I know, this probably makes me a "simple-minded fool of a believer", but the fact is, while the Atheist can raise similar and troubling questions, which are difficult to answer, they STILL end up with a FAITH-DECLARATION of their own... The only difference is they it would seem prefer their own, because, of course, they in themselves, are wholly competent to know it all about it all. As a devout believer in Christ, I admit, this is perhaps the best argument (in the article about Isa 55: 8-9) that I have come across. And I confess, I have struggled with the very same questions myself. As beievers, we're taught to understand these questions and dilemmas as "the testing of your (our faith), more precious than gold". We are warned not to abandon the faith (on fear of punishment, chastening, or for some Christians who believe salvation once given by God, can be revoked by Him, being sent to hell). So, we are in effect, told to abandon our minds, "doubt our doubts" and still affirm that He is GOOD, that no matter how "irrational" God may appear - by either His delay to bring about the promises He has made in His word about answered prayer, or His refusal to answer our prayers (how many believers have prayed for a healing for sick loved one, have stood on the promises of God relative to such and still saw that loved one or friend die from that sickness? Yet the promise of James is "The LORD WILL raise them up" (when the Elders of the church have prayed "the prayer of faith" and "anointed in the name of the Lord" etc). Jesus promised, "I tell you the truth, if two of you shall agree on earth concerning anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of My Father in heaven"...yet, it we're honest, how many debout believers can attest to lack of answered prayer? These questions do indeed trouble me, I admit.

Yet I would offer this for consideration: One person commented

My answer and question to such a claim would be this: If your OWN standard of intelligence and sanity differs from say, an Adolf Hitler, or Jeffery Dhamer, then whose specific STANDARD of intelligence is worthy to judge whether God is acting in a "rational" way? Since there is no universally accepted STANDARD by which all other sentiment, understanding or belief is to be judged, then in point of fact, no human intelligence would or even could judge God.

The belief in atheism (and I admit, I have wrestled with many of these questions myself), ultimately, seeks to make sense of life and the world we live in, according to it's OWN understanding or opinion on the nature of life, morality (however it be defined by any culture at any time). Who made the Athiest ALL-KNOWING? Who said they know enough about everything there is to know in the universe (which is pretty big), and that they are competent therefore to judge the claims of God as being "illogical"? Is it just me, or is the irony present in such a fantatic and inconsistent claim, hidden from they themselves?

To assume we could understand EVERYTHING about a being who transcends our finite and mortal existence, is, IMO, arrogant folly. A God who is no bigger than any of those who made a comment in favour of Atheism, would be, for myself, not worthy of my respect or reverence....I know, this probably makes me a "simple-minded fool of a believer", but the fact is, while the Atheist can raise similar and troubling questions, which are difficult to answer, they STILL end up with a FAITH-DECLARATION of their own... The only difference is they it would seem prefer their own, because, of course, they in themselves, are wholly competent to know it all about it all.

]]> By: goyo http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-42269 goyo Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:22:17 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-42269 mac Indeed, let's look at the founders: Who founded judaism? What do we know about him/her? Who founded xtianity? What do we know about him/her? If you are intellectually honest, you will have to admit, very little. mac
Indeed, let's look at the founders:
Who founded judaism? What do we know about him/her?
Who founded xtianity? What do we know about him/her?
If you are intellectually honest, you will have to admit, very little.

]]> By: Brad http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-42261 Brad Thu, 11 Dec 2008 04:31:36 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-42261 I do regret the former comment - it was unfairly suppressive. I do regret the former comment - it was unfairly suppressive.

]]> By: Mac http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-42259 Mac Thu, 11 Dec 2008 03:54:22 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-42259 Brad, What do you call the past 50-some comments? I'm amused that when persons of one particular faith (Christian or otherwise) present their perspective, it's "preaching," yet for a discussion board of all-knowing atheists its simply discussion. Surely if an atheistic world view is superior, one would welcome such comments, so as to shed the light of knowledge on the millions of people out there obviously duped, right? Is the idea to just pool our ignorance, or actually REASONably get at truth? If there can be bigoted and closed-minded Christians, Muslims, etc., then it stands to reason that the same can be true for atheists. I mean, was this discussion for "My ways are not your ways" meant to make a bunch of atheists feel good, or is it meant to actually understand its meaning, weigh it against ALL the evidence, and hence make judgment. Make no mistake, any belief system has some element of faith, even atheism. Next, one would be a poor judge of character if they took every person on a first-impression basis. In other words, you would have to understand that person in multiple contexts, right? Did they have a bad day at the office, are the kids sick again, did the dog get run over, was he beat as a kid, did she witness that horrible event back in '85; etc. I should think that each one of us would like to be viewed "in context." When we don't do this, we make some pretty downright stupid mistakes, simply because we didn't take the time to understand the seemingly confusing, quirky, strange, etc. Similarly, it stands to reason that the best way to come at a verse such as the one presented (or any verse from any religion) is in its context; textually, historically, etc. Thus, this discussion board should, one might think, welcome Virginia's comments, as it provides more context to go on; to judge, to some extent, whether it is a valid point. I would hardly call presenting key doctrines of any religion for discussion "preaching," unless of course you're feeling a wee bit convicted. ;-) Finally, it may be said (and has) that the best look into a belief system is by looking at its founder. Thus, if one truly wants to get an understanding of Islam, let us take a good look at this so-called prophet named Muhammad WHILE looking at the Koran. If you are indeed trying to judge whether Judaism or Christianity is valid, look to their founders. Since Christians are in the crosshairs (though historically nowhere near as long as the Jews), let us take an objective look at this self-acclaimed God-man named Jesus, called the Christ. Honestly, If the design was to rant and rave about how foolish religious folks are and barely scratch the philosophical surface... aren't you proving the very thing they supposedly claim atheists do? May the best argument win! Brad,

What do you call the past 50-some comments? I'm amused that when persons of one particular faith (Christian or otherwise) present their perspective, it's "preaching," yet for a discussion board of all-knowing atheists its simply discussion. Surely if an atheistic world view is superior, one would welcome such comments, so as to shed the light of knowledge on the millions of people out there obviously duped, right?

Is the idea to just pool our ignorance, or actually REASONably get at truth? If there can be bigoted and closed-minded Christians, Muslims, etc., then it stands to reason that the same can be true for atheists. I mean, was this discussion for "My ways are not your ways" meant to make a bunch of atheists feel good, or is it meant to actually understand its meaning, weigh it against ALL the evidence, and hence make judgment. Make no mistake, any belief system has some element of faith, even atheism.

Next, one would be a poor judge of character if they took every person on a first-impression basis. In other words, you would have to understand that person in multiple contexts, right? Did they have a bad day at the office, are the kids sick again, did the dog get run over, was he beat as a kid, did she witness that horrible event back in '85; etc. I should think that each one of us would like to be viewed "in context." When we don't do this, we make some pretty downright stupid mistakes, simply because we didn't take the time to understand the seemingly confusing, quirky, strange, etc.

Similarly, it stands to reason that the best way to come at a verse such as the one presented (or any verse from any religion) is in its context; textually, historically, etc. Thus, this discussion board should, one might think, welcome Virginia's comments, as it provides more context to go on; to judge, to some extent, whether it is a valid point. I would hardly call presenting key doctrines of any religion for discussion "preaching," unless of course you're feeling a wee bit convicted. ;-)

Finally, it may be said (and has) that the best look into a belief system is by looking at its founder. Thus, if one truly wants to get an understanding of Islam, let us take a good look at this so-called prophet named Muhammad WHILE looking at the Koran. If you are indeed trying to judge whether Judaism or Christianity is valid, look to their founders. Since Christians are in the crosshairs (though historically nowhere near as long as the Jews), let us take an objective look at this self-acclaimed God-man named Jesus, called the Christ.

Honestly, If the design was to rant and rave about how foolish religious folks are and barely scratch the philosophical surface... aren't you proving the very thing they supposedly claim atheists do?

May the best argument win!

]]> By: Virginia http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-41208 Virginia Mon, 17 Nov 2008 05:44:48 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-41208 karatemack, God indeed takes accountability towards mankind. Many instances in the Bible, God did things so that "people know that He is God/Lord". This is accountability. God in the Bible also referred to the mutual covenant with Hebrews -- a two way agreeement which God is required to keep His words -- another form of accountability. Finally, Isaiah 55:8-9 which you quoted again in defense of God not having have to answer mankind is a self-undermining way -- if God's way is so much above yours, how can you answer on God's behalf as though you know his ways ? karatemack, God indeed takes accountability towards mankind. Many instances in the Bible, God did things so that "people know that He is God/Lord".
This is accountability.
God in the Bible also referred to the mutual covenant with Hebrews -- a two way agreeement which God is required to keep His words -- another form of accountability.
Finally, Isaiah 55:8-9 which you quoted again in defense of God not having have to answer mankind is a self-undermining way -- if God's way is so much above yours, how can you answer on God's behalf as though you know his ways ?

]]> By: Billy http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-41169 Billy Sun, 16 Nov 2008 13:11:59 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-41169 I like using this one against them too. You may be interested in Stephen Law's "god of Eth" posts http://stephenlaw.blogspot.com/search/label/The%20God%20of%20Eth which reverse the moral nature of god and shows how worthless the "good god" claim acually is I like using this one against them too.

You may be interested in Stephen Law's "god of Eth" posts http://stephenlaw.blogspot.com/search/label/The%20God%20of%20Eth which reverse the moral nature of god and shows how worthless the "good god" claim acually is

]]> By: Brad http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-39200 Brad Fri, 03 Oct 2008 04:34:17 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-39200 karatemack, you are preaching. This is against comment policy. If you would like to voice such long personal opinions, then please do so on your own site. You can easily set up a free wordpress blog or googlepages site if you want to. And then you can link to said blog or site with the Website option in comments here at Daylight Atheism. And yes, I would legitimately "like to hear more about why [you] believe Christianity is distinct and why [you] believe the Bible is authoritative and complete" - just do this sort of talking elsewhere. This place isn't a pulpit. Sorry Ebonmuse, couldn't resist. karatemack, you are preaching. This is against comment policy. If you would like to voice such long personal opinions, then please do so on your own site. You can easily set up a free wordpress blog or googlepages site if you want to. And then you can link to said blog or site with the Website option in comments here at Daylight Atheism.

And yes, I would legitimately "like to hear more about why [you] believe Christianity is distinct and why [you] believe the Bible is authoritative and complete" - just do this sort of talking elsewhere. This place isn't a pulpit.

Sorry Ebonmuse, couldn't resist.

]]> By: OMGF http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-39141 OMGF Thu, 02 Oct 2008 03:15:16 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-39141 karatemack, <blockquote>It would not be fair for me, as a Christian, to denounce the Quran as complete heresy unless I first understood it's content...Second, I come with my prejudice towards the Bible as the only authoritative Word of God. And Third (though probably not last), I come with my presupposition that anything which contradicts the Bible cannot be valid in terms of it's doctrine.</blockquote> Make up your mind. <blockquote>Not that I think anyone needed a lecture on subjectivity, but it's only fair to point out that if I, as a Christian, have a certain amount of subjectivity which will ultimately affect my interpretation of the Quran; then it is equally true to say that any Athiest or person who holds to another belief system will bring the same amount of subjectivity.</blockquote> Except that's simply not necessarily true. Your subjectivity is based on you accepting unevidenced assertions that are not proven. If I reject those assertions due to their lack of proof or evidence, then I have made a more objective determination than you. <blockquote>So, then, how am I able to possibly justify my position as a Christian with any type of validity when comparing my beliefs to those of other religions?</blockquote> You can't, considering that you've already told us that you simply assume the Bible is correct. <blockquote>My point? All four major world religions hold that the OT was a part of God's revealed truth about Himself.</blockquote> Irrelevant. <blockquote>If you read this verse more carefully, I believe you will find the SUBJECT of the verse is forgiveness.</blockquote> Please support this statement, considering that I see nothing in the verse about forgiveness. <blockquote>God's thoughts are higher than our thought and His ways higher than our ways when we consider His great forgiveness of people.</blockquote> Is that how you rationalize the immorality of sending people to hell? <blockquote>It says that Abram believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness. Perhaps God is willing to look at us a little differently than we look at ourselves. We judge each other based upon deed alone, whereas God is able to judge the heart. Weak argument?</blockquote> Yes, very weak. You're claiming that god doesn't judge us by our morality, but by our ability to figure out what the correct beliefs about him are, and that somehow is a moral position for god to take. <blockquote>The fact that God offers mercy (underserved favor) to sinful people (not perfect people) and declares them to be righteous because of their faith in Him, is certainly a RADICAL teaching.</blockquote> And highly immoral. <blockquote>Does God HAVE to reveal the why for His ways to be truly good?</blockquote> I doubt that you, god, or anyone can come up with a why for putting people in hell for eternal torment. <blockquote>Does God answer to man?</blockquote> Yes. He has a moral obligation to us. <blockquote>NO credible religion accepts the premise that God is somehow accountable to mankind.</blockquote> Which makes them less than credible. <blockquote>If I tell my child not to touch a hot pot on a stove, I have a good reason. My child is incapable of understanding WHY, so they simply have to trust me that what I have said comes from a loving father.</blockquote> A better approach would be to use the example as a way to teach the child, instead of simply issuing commands. Still, what assurance do you have that god is issuing commands for your benefit? <blockquote>Many of the opinions I hear and read often reflect a misunderstanding of what the Bible teaches (which to be fair is often propogated by people claiming to be christians)...</blockquote> How do you know that your interpretations of the Bible are more authoritative than anyone else's? <blockquote>God loves you...</blockquote> Which is why he will send us to hell for disbelief I suppose? karatemack,

It would not be fair for me, as a Christian, to denounce the Quran as complete heresy unless I first understood it's content...Second, I come with my prejudice towards the Bible as the only authoritative Word of God. And Third (though probably not last), I come with my presupposition that anything which contradicts the Bible cannot be valid in terms of it's doctrine.

Make up your mind.

Not that I think anyone needed a lecture on subjectivity, but it's only fair to point out that if I, as a Christian, have a certain amount of subjectivity which will ultimately affect my interpretation of the Quran; then it is equally true to say that any Athiest or person who holds to another belief system will bring the same amount of subjectivity.

Except that's simply not necessarily true. Your subjectivity is based on you accepting unevidenced assertions that are not proven. If I reject those assertions due to their lack of proof or evidence, then I have made a more objective determination than you.

So, then, how am I able to possibly justify my position as a Christian with any type of validity when comparing my beliefs to those of other religions?

You can't, considering that you've already told us that you simply assume the Bible is correct.

My point? All four major world religions hold that the OT was a part of God's revealed truth about Himself.

Irrelevant.

If you read this verse more carefully, I believe you will find the SUBJECT of the verse is forgiveness.

Please support this statement, considering that I see nothing in the verse about forgiveness.

God's thoughts are higher than our thought and His ways higher than our ways when we consider His great forgiveness of people.

Is that how you rationalize the immorality of sending people to hell?

It says that Abram believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness. Perhaps God is willing to look at us a little differently than we look at ourselves. We judge each other based upon deed alone, whereas God is able to judge the heart. Weak argument?

Yes, very weak. You're claiming that god doesn't judge us by our morality, but by our ability to figure out what the correct beliefs about him are, and that somehow is a moral position for god to take.

The fact that God offers mercy (underserved favor) to sinful people (not perfect people) and declares them to be righteous because of their faith in Him, is certainly a RADICAL teaching.

And highly immoral.

Does God HAVE to reveal the why for His ways to be truly good?

I doubt that you, god, or anyone can come up with a why for putting people in hell for eternal torment.

Does God answer to man?

Yes. He has a moral obligation to us.

NO credible religion accepts the premise that God is somehow accountable to mankind.

Which makes them less than credible.

If I tell my child not to touch a hot pot on a stove, I have a good reason. My child is incapable of understanding WHY, so they simply have to trust me that what I have said comes from a loving father.

A better approach would be to use the example as a way to teach the child, instead of simply issuing commands. Still, what assurance do you have that god is issuing commands for your benefit?

Many of the opinions I hear and read often reflect a misunderstanding of what the Bible teaches (which to be fair is often propogated by people claiming to be christians)...

How do you know that your interpretations of the Bible are more authoritative than anyone else's?

God loves you...

Which is why he will send us to hell for disbelief I suppose?

]]> By: karatemack http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-39098 karatemack Wed, 01 Oct 2008 12:37:19 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-39098 People who teach from the Bible (or criticize it) should have a proper understanding of what it says. It would not be fair for me, as a Christian, to denounce the Quran as complete heresy unless I first understood it's content. Even then I will be the first to admit that I would have certain presuppositions about the text which would prevent complete subjectivity. First, I come with my preunderstanding of western culture which will undoubtedly be applied to anything I read in the Quran. Second, I come with my prejudice towards the Bible as the only authoritative Word of God. And Third (though probably not last), I come with my presupposition that anything which contradicts the Bible cannot be valid in terms of it's doctrine. Not that I think anyone needed a lecture on subjectivity, but it's only fair to point out that if I, as a Christian, have a certain amount of subjectivity which will ultimately affect my interpretation of the Quran; then it is equally true to say that any Athiest or person who holds to another belief system will bring the same amount of subjectivity. Do I claim to be the best person to properly interpret what the Quran says? Absolutely not! How could I be? Given my admitted subjectivity, I won't accept the Quran as truth at all and will undoubtably miss the original author's intended meaning. So, then, how am I able to possibly justify my position as a Christian with any type of validity when comparing my beliefs to those of other religions? What a long discussion that would be! Briefly; Judaism, Catholicism, Protestantism and Muslims all trace their religous roots back to Abraham. All four accept the OT as a part of God's revealed truth. Judaism accepts it as a currently completed work. Catholicism accepts it along with the NT and Apocrapha. Protestants accept it with the NT only. And Muslims claim that God is revealing Himself in stages, and that the last revelead truth replaces previously revealed truth. So they hold to the Quran and the teachings of Mohammed. My point? All four major world religions hold that the OT was a part of God's revealed truth about Himself. Luckily, for our discussion then, the verse originally quoted is from the OT. If you read this verse more carefully, I believe you will find the SUBJECT of the verse is forgiveness. God's thoughts are higher than our thought and His ways higher than our ways when we consider His great forgiveness of people. Noah was given in a previous example. Not what we would call a good person. Yet the Bible states he was a righteous man who walked with God. Why? We find an interesting verse in Genesis 15:6 (again OT). It says that Abram believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness. Perhaps God is willing to look at us a little differently than we look at ourselves. We judge each other based upon deed alone, whereas God is able to judge the heart. Weak argument? After all... Noah got drunk soon after the flood. Perhaps when we look at the sins of Noah and his family (Ham) we see the POINT of the verse in Isaiah quoted. If Noah and his sinful family were saved by God's grace (despite their obvious faults), then how much more sinful the rest of humanity must have become that God was not willing to hold back judgement upon them. The fact that God offers mercy (underserved favor) to sinful people (not perfect people) and declares them to be righteous because of their faith in Him, is certainly a RADICAL teaching. Can I understand certain things about God and His will without knowing EVERYTHING about Him? I think so. I know that a piano maker is skilled. I can learn from an instructor how to properly handle the piano which was made. I can increase in skill on the piano and learn the in's and out's of the how the piano functions. Do I gain any knowledge, from my intimate exploration of the piano maker's creation, about the piano maker himself from which I could claim a personal relationship with him? Do I know his political affiliation? Do I know what foods he prefers to eat? Do I know the name of his wife or if he has one? Probably not. Not unless I either had a personal relationship with him, and even then I would only know those things about him which he chose to reveal to me (unless I'm a stalker). Does God HAVE to reveal the why for His ways to be truly good? Does God answer to man? Well, no. NO credible religion accepts the premise that God is somehow accountable to mankind. I think the point in an earlier example was missed entirely. If I tell my child not to touch a hot pot on a stove, I have a good reason. My child is incapable of understanding WHY, so they simply have to trust me that what I have said comes from a loving father. If they choose to disobey, they are actually choosing to suffer. If they listen, they'll enjoy the freedom which comes from not being burned. They are kept safe by my loving restriction. This is what is meant when we say we cannot always fully understand God's ways. Not that He isn't clear about some of the WHAT's, but that He doesn't necessarily always reveal the WHY's. Why doesn't God tell us why? Again; 1. because He's God and isn't accountable to us, 2. it could be we wouldn't understand even if he did try to explain, 3. God wants us to trust Him. Many of the opinions I hear and read often reflect a misunderstanding of what the Bible teaches (which to be fair is often propogated by people claiming to be christians) or reflect a prejudice which is not really objective at all and seeks only to discredit a Book which was predetermined to be false. I won't post more at this time as I know I've already written a fairly long post. If you legitimately would like to hear more about why I believe Christianity is distinct and why I believe the Bible is authoritative and complete (OT and NT), then please let me know. Otherwise, I don't want to waste your time (more than scrolling through this post has) or give you cause to be angry. God loves you and it is my prayer that He will bless you despite your unbelief, and that you would come to know the truth about Him and that that truth would set you free. People who teach from the Bible (or criticize it) should have a proper understanding of what it says. It would not be fair for me, as a Christian, to denounce the Quran as complete heresy unless I first understood it's content. Even then I will be the first to admit that I would have certain presuppositions about the text which would prevent complete subjectivity. First, I come with my preunderstanding of western culture which will undoubtedly be applied to anything I read in the Quran. Second, I come with my prejudice towards the Bible as the only authoritative Word of God. And Third (though probably not last), I come with my presupposition that anything which contradicts the Bible cannot be valid in terms of it's doctrine.

Not that I think anyone needed a lecture on subjectivity, but it's only fair to point out that if I, as a Christian, have a certain amount of subjectivity which will ultimately affect my interpretation of the Quran; then it is equally true to say that any Athiest or person who holds to another belief system will bring the same amount of subjectivity. Do I claim to be the best person to properly interpret what the Quran says? Absolutely not! How could I be? Given my admitted subjectivity, I won't accept the Quran as truth at all and will undoubtably miss the original author's intended meaning.

So, then, how am I able to possibly justify my position as a Christian with any type of validity when comparing my beliefs to those of other religions? What a long discussion that would be! Briefly; Judaism, Catholicism, Protestantism and Muslims all trace their religous roots back to Abraham. All four accept the OT as a part of God's revealed truth. Judaism accepts it as a currently completed work. Catholicism accepts it along with the NT and Apocrapha. Protestants accept it with the NT only. And Muslims claim that God is revealing Himself in stages, and that the last revelead truth replaces previously revealed truth. So they hold to the Quran and the teachings of Mohammed. My point? All four major world religions hold that the OT was a part of God's revealed truth about Himself.

Luckily, for our discussion then, the verse originally quoted is from the OT. If you read this verse more carefully, I believe you will find the SUBJECT of the verse is forgiveness. God's thoughts are higher than our thought and His ways higher than our ways when we consider His great forgiveness of people. Noah was given in a previous example. Not what we would call a good person. Yet the Bible states he was a righteous man who walked with God. Why? We find an interesting verse in Genesis 15:6 (again OT). It says that Abram believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness. Perhaps God is willing to look at us a little differently than we look at ourselves. We judge each other based upon deed alone, whereas God is able to judge the heart. Weak argument? After all... Noah got drunk soon after the flood. Perhaps when we look at the sins of Noah and his family (Ham) we see the POINT of the verse in Isaiah quoted. If Noah and his sinful family were saved by God's grace (despite their obvious faults), then how much more sinful the rest of humanity must have become that God was not willing to hold back judgement upon them. The fact that God offers mercy (underserved favor) to sinful people (not perfect people) and declares them to be righteous because of their faith in Him, is certainly a RADICAL teaching.

Can I understand certain things about God and His will without knowing EVERYTHING about Him? I think so. I know that a piano maker is skilled. I can learn from an instructor how to properly handle the piano which was made. I can increase in skill on the piano and learn the in's and out's of the how the piano functions. Do I gain any knowledge, from my intimate exploration of the piano maker's creation, about the piano maker himself from which I could claim a personal relationship with him? Do I know his political affiliation? Do I know what foods he prefers to eat? Do I know the name of his wife or if he has one? Probably not. Not unless I either had a personal relationship with him, and even then I would only know those things about him which he chose to reveal to me (unless I'm a stalker).

Does God HAVE to reveal the why for His ways to be truly good? Does God answer to man? Well, no. NO credible religion accepts the premise that God is somehow accountable to mankind. I think the point in an earlier example was missed entirely. If I tell my child not to touch a hot pot on a stove, I have a good reason. My child is incapable of understanding WHY, so they simply have to trust me that what I have said comes from a loving father. If they choose to disobey, they are actually choosing to suffer. If they listen, they'll enjoy the freedom which comes from not being burned. They are kept safe by my loving restriction. This is what is meant when we say we cannot always fully understand God's ways. Not that He isn't clear about some of the WHAT's, but that He doesn't necessarily always reveal the WHY's. Why doesn't God tell us why? Again; 1. because He's God and isn't accountable to us, 2. it could be we wouldn't understand even if he did try to explain, 3. God wants us to trust Him.

Many of the opinions I hear and read often reflect a misunderstanding of what the Bible teaches (which to be fair is often propogated by people claiming to be christians) or reflect a prejudice which is not really objective at all and seeks only to discredit a Book which was predetermined to be false.

I won't post more at this time as I know I've already written a fairly long post. If you legitimately would like to hear more about why I believe Christianity is distinct and why I believe the Bible is authoritative and complete (OT and NT), then please let me know. Otherwise, I don't want to waste your time (more than scrolling through this post has) or give you cause to be angry. God loves you and it is my prayer that He will bless you despite your unbelief, and that you would come to know the truth about Him and that that truth would set you free.

]]> By: Alex Weaver http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-37967 Alex Weaver Sun, 24 Aug 2008 05:29:51 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/12/my-ways-are-not-your-ways.html#comment-37967 <blockquote>God is a being than which nothing greater can be conceived -St. Anselm</blockquote> I can conceive of a being greater than the god depicted by the bible. Morally, at least, I AM one.

God is a being than which nothing greater can be conceived -St. Anselm

I can conceive of a being greater than the god depicted by the bible. Morally, at least, I AM one.

]]>