Is The Bible Literally True?

[Cerebrum123]

Thanks for the vote of confidence, OBP. What do people want a defence of ?

One of the mods asked me to explain myself. So I did, in nauseating detail. If a nauseatingly long defence is wanted. I will endeavour to give satisfaction

"The Resurrection of Christ is a real event - not in history, which belongs to the natural order; but in the strictly supernatural order. It is a theological reality - not a biological one. "

That is the part that raised eyebrows.

[KingsGambit]

Also, God isn't human

Uh....

[JimL]

No, because there's nothing inherently unjust about using rights you have. Your problem here is assuming that God has the same limitations as a human; He doesn't. Life literally belongs to Him - He has every right to take back that which is His. It's not unjust to take away from someone something that does not belong to them and restore it to the Original Owner.

But the real problem is SH is misunderstanding what death is - he's assuming all death is the same as destruction. It's not. Since no one is untouched by sin, his literalist rendering fails. Since he isn't very good at this, I've pretty much kept to that line. But the difference is significant.

If God destroyed the innocent - in contravention of His own rules - THEN you'd have a basis for this argument. But no where in Scripture is that the case. Death is often used poetically as destruction but it's the latter, not the former, that is punitive. Death in this life is almost more metaphor for the coming destruction than it is actual death. Jesus hints at this when He tells us to 'fear the One Who can destroy both body and spirit in Hell'. All have sinned. All will experience death (well, excepting Elijah and anyone present at the Rapture!). But NOT all will experience destruction in Hell (yes, this is the basis for annhilism). It's that final 'death' that is to be feared - and which is linked directly to guilt or innocence.

What is just is what is right in and of itself, not because one has the arbitrary right to do as he pleases. Power is not justice, and justice is not arbitrary, neither of a man or of god, because arbitrary contradicts the very definition of justice. And, you can not have an objective moral standard if the source of that morality is not itself bound by it.

[Teallaura]

What is just is what is right in and of itself, not because one has the arbitrary right to do as he pleases. Power is not justice, and justice is not arbitrary, neither of a man or of god, because arbitrary contradicts the very definition of justice. And, you can not have an objective moral standard if the source of that morality is not itself bound by it.

Okay, - no.

There is nothing inherently arbitrary about God's proprietary rights - actually, I can't see any argument for arbitrary at all.

There is nothing unjust about exercising a right, whether God or Man.

God literally cannot murder - for murder to take place He would have to be taking something the victim has proprietary right to - which is impossible since that right is God's. Incidentally, you are now arguing that the natural universe is inherently unjust.

Since God cannot murder (in my view because He doesn't violate His nature and do irrational things like making square circles) there is literally no way that He is in any violation of His own standard. If I own the ball and you steal it, you are a thief. If you own the ball the best you can do is pretend to steal from yourself - you literally cannot be a thief by taking your own property. God cannot murder by taking the life He owns.

Nitpick: God's nature is such that He doesn't violate His own standards - which is true in the examples cited.

[Teallaura]

Uh....

I can be Captain Obvious if I wanna!

[Christianbookworm]

I can be Captain Obvious if I wanna!

I think he was referring to the incarnation. Which still doesn't count. Jesus is not merely a human. He is a human, but only because He took on human flesh. You were meaning that God isn't the god of Mormonism, right?

[JimL]

Okay, - no.

There is nothing inherently arbitrary about God's proprietary rights - actually, I can't see any argument for arbitrary at all.

There is nothing unjust about exercising a right, whether God or Man.

God literally cannot murder - for murder to take place He would have to be taking something the victim has proprietary right to - which is impossible since that right is God's. Incidentally, you are now arguing that the natural universe is inherently unjust.

Since God cannot murder (in my view because He doesn't violate His nature and do irrational things like making square circles) there is literally no way that He is in any violation of His own standard. If I own the ball and you steal it, you are a thief. If you own the ball the best you can do is pretend to steal from yourself - you literally cannot be a thief by taking your own property. God cannot murder by taking the life He owns.

Nitpick: God's nature is such that He doesn't violate His own standards - which is true in the examples cited.

Ever hear of the scales of justice, Tea. It's about fairness not about arbitrary choice. You can argue that god can do whatever he wants, but if he treats in an unfair way two people who committed the same crime, then it is injustice whether he has the power to do it or not. You're confusing justice with power.

[Christianbookworm]

Fair would be to not bother with the mean creatures accusing the Creator being unfair. He won't force you to accept the offer. Feral adult animals make terrible pets. Better to release them where they can't harm the tame strays that want a good home. Of course, God made the first move. That is what a rescuer does when the rescuee is incapable of taking the first step. But jim has ignored the life preserver for so long, I can't know if there is any hope for jiml. At least he hasn't been banned from the spacetime continuum yet.

[Teallaura]

I think he was referring to the incarnation. Which still doesn't count. Jesus is not merely a human. He is a human, but only because He took on human flesh. You were meaning that God isn't the god of Mormonism, right?

Jesus was fully human AND fully divine - but I was actually thinking about God the Father and not the Incarnation in particular.

[Teallaura]

Ever hear of the scales of justice, Tea. It's about fairness not about arbitrary choice. You can argue that god can do whatever he wants, but if he treats in an unfair way two people who committed the same crime, then it is injustice whether he has the power to do it or not. You're confusing justice with power.

Except the 'unfair' part is patently untrue. There's nothing unfair or unjust in exercising your rights - at all. Period. God is not acting outside the limits of His rights because there are none. And you really cannot make a case for 'arbitrary' here - nor would it matter if you could. His ball - He can take it back any time He pleases and He has done you no wrong when He does so.

[Teallaura]

Uh....

Rethinking this in light of CBW's explanation...



There is not enough brain bleach in the world to get the notion of 'wait, how does Christ's humanity figure in the Trinity?' out of my tiny head.

MY BRAIN IS EXPLODING!!!



Thanks ever so much....

[Christianbookworm]

Jesus was fully human AND fully divine - but I was actually thinking about God the Father and not the Incarnation in particular.

That's what I thought. And the Holy Spirit is also incorporal(did I spell that right?). So two out of the three persons don't have a body. Just the Word of God. Don't expect jim to understand the Trinity or the incarnation though. One God, three persons!

[Teallaura]

That's what I thought. And the Holy Spirit is also incorporal (did I spell that right?). So two out of the three persons don't have a body. Just the Word of God. Don't expect jim to understand the Trinity or the incarnation though. One God, three persons!

incorporeal - but you were pretty close!


But it's okay for KG to blow up my tiny brain by making me think about Christ's humanity in relation to the Trinity, huh?

[Christianbookworm]

incorporeal - but you were pretty close!


But it's okay for KG to blow up my tiny brain by making me think about Christ's humanity in relation to the Trinity, huh?

Eh, there's a good reason there are so many heresies concerning the Trinity and Incarnation. It's hard for us to understand, because we have a one person equals one being
But with God, one being is three persons. I might say one Mind with three centers of consciousness, but I don't know if that is right. I do know that trithiesm is not the same as the Trinity, no matter how much a certain entertainment industry thinks the word just means three seperate people and beings
And the Son and the Holy Spirit are not secret identities of God the Father.

[JimL]

Fair would be to not bother with the mean creatures accusing the Creator being unfair. He won't force you to accept the offer. Feral adult animals make terrible pets. Better to release them where they can't harm the tame strays that want a good home. Of course, God made the first move. That is what a rescuer does when the rescuee is incapable of taking the first step. But jim has ignored the life preserver for so long, I can't know if there is any hope for jiml. At least he hasn't been banned from the spacetime continuum yet.