Homestar Runner Wiki Forum
http://forum.hrwiki.org/

Bible FAQ: Doubts? Curiosities? Contradictions? Come here!
http://forum.hrwiki.org/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=5268		 Page 5 of 17
Author:  Didymus [ Wed Jun 14, 2006 9:16 pm ]
Post subject: 
And that's one of the themes of both of those books. Imperfect man does not belong in the world of those beings. His presence can only cause problems. (Although in Perelandra, Ransom's presence to counteract the evil of Weston's was in fact necessary).
Author:  HHFOV [ Mon Jun 19, 2006 1:42 am ]
Post subject: 
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is He able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is He both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is He neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?.... (?)
Author:  Capt. Ido Nos [ Mon Jun 19, 2006 2:04 am ]
Post subject: 
HipHoppityFrogOfValue wrote:
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is He able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is He both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is He neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?.... (?)


Okay, let's see what you're saying: if God truely loved us, then why would evil exist in the world?

Just making sure I've got this before I answer.
Author:  Didymus [ Mon Jun 19, 2006 3:02 am ]
Post subject: 
It's the whole "Problem of Pain" issue that has been answered on numerous threads before.

The fact is, God has in fact done the greatest thing that could possibly address the problem of evil: he suffered it, endured it, sacrificed himself to defeat it. The answer to the Problem of Evil is the cross, where God himself suffered the consequences of evil, and simultaneously offered mankind a way to escape it. "God demonstrates his perfect love for us in this: while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8).

Now, the alternative to God performing such an act of self-giving self-sacrifice would have been for him to completely destroy all evil in the beginning. And if he had done that, the human race would have been wiped out completely. Make no mistake about it: every human being that has ever walked the face of this planet has in one way or another, whether only a tiny bit or in some grand atrocious way, has contributed to the evil that exists in this world. If God were completely just, and did not show mercy, then we would all be destroyed and have no hope. So, in a very real sense, God allowing evil to exist is in fact a form of love - he's allowing us to exist, even though we sin and create evil for ourselves and others.

The answer? For him to allow evil to exist, but to find a way to turn that evil toward good. God's supreme act of justice takes the form of the most dispicable act of injustice - the torture and execution of a perfectly innocent man. God's supreme act of mercy takes the form of the most horrible atrocity - a man beaten and crucified. God's supreme act of reconciliation with mankind takes the form of him allowing himself to be rejected, abandoned, and betrayed by the very same people he came to save. God's gift of eternal life takes the form of death - even death on a cross. So what is God's answer to evil? By turning evil on its head and making it work for good.

So, given the perspective of the cross, the "Problem of Evil" question then becomes vain philosophical speculation.
Author:  lahimatoa [ Mon Jun 19, 2006 4:15 am ]
Post subject: 
My response to the "Problem of Pain" has always been to explain the concept of opposition.

If we were never sad, being happy would mean nothing. If we were never in pain, we wouldn't recognize how good it is to be free of it.

You get the idea.
Author:  extremejon09 [ Mon Jun 19, 2006 4:18 am ]
Post subject: 
*kay, I probbly got stuffed mixed up but...*

Noahs Ark.

See, this just boggles my mind. How is this possible? 2 of every animal?! How could there be a ship that could hold that much? And what about sea turtles? Don't they need land to lay their eggs?

And isn't there something about how God created rainbows afterwards to promise that he would never do that again? How does that make sense? Aren't Rainbows created by Light shineing through Prisims? The only way that could be possible if there wasn't like... a visible spectrum of light before then... Did early human have sound-vision?

Hm. Feeling Silly now.
Author:  Didymus [ Mon Jun 19, 2006 4:25 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
See, this just boggles my mind. How is this possible? 2 of every animal?! How could there be a ship that could hold that much?

When I'm feeling less lazy, I'll take a look at the exact dimensions and calculate the volume.

Quote:
And what about sea turtles? Don't they need land to lay their eggs?

But the flood was only temporary. Once it was over, there was plenty of land for them to lay eggs.

Quote:
And isn't there something about how God created rainbows afterwards to promise that he would never do that again? How does that make sense? Aren't Rainbows created by Light shineing through Prisims? The only way that could be possible if there wasn't like... a visible spectrum of light before then... Did early human have sound-vision?

Actually, the text does not say he created rainbows at that time, but rather that the rainbow was to serve as a sign to Noah and his sons of the Lord's covenant with them from that time forth.
Author:  Cobalt [ Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:16 pm ]
Post subject: 
extremejon09 wrote:
Noahs Ark.

See, this just boggles my mind. How is this possible? 2 of every animal?! How could there be a ship that could hold that much?


well, it was a miracle. i'm not sure how satisfying an answer that is, but there you go.
Author:  Didymus [ Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:26 pm ]
Post subject: 
Actually, I just took a look at the dimensions of the Ark. 450 ft. x 75 ft. x 45 ft. That's about the size of one and a half football fields. And that's assuming there's only one deck.
Author:  StrongRad [ Mon Jun 19, 2006 9:28 pm ]
Post subject: 
Didymus wrote:
Actually, I just took a look at the dimensions of the Ark. 450 ft. x 75 ft. x 45 ft. That's about the size of one and a half football fields. And that's assuming there's only one deck.


My only real problem with the ark thing is that I'm guessing there were no toilet facilities for the animal. God must've told Noah he could skip on the fiber tablets for each animal. Either that, or God decided to give him access to the almighty's pooper scooper, Mike Rowe.
Author:  ed 'lim' smilde [ Mon Jun 19, 2006 9:34 pm ]
Post subject: 
Maybe they had to go wherever they were and make a small pile... do we know how long they were in the ark anyways?
Author:  StrongRad [ Mon Jun 19, 2006 9:38 pm ]
Post subject: 
ed 'lim' smilde wrote:
Maybe they had to go wherever they were and make a small pile... do we know how long they were in the ark anyways?

Well, it rained for 40 Days and Nights... Not sure how much longer it took until the water receeded. I'm sure it say, but I don't remember.
Author:  Didymus [ Mon Jun 19, 2006 9:47 pm ]
Post subject: 
150 days.
Author:  StrongRad [ Mon Jun 19, 2006 10:08 pm ]
Post subject: 
Didymus wrote:
150 days.

That'd be a lotta 'doo.. Wow.
Author:  Capt. Ido Nos [ Tue Jun 20, 2006 12:55 am ]
Post subject: 
Popping into this discusion, I'd like to point out that it wasn't necessarily adult animals and all that jazz that had to be in the ark. Noah could have very well had lots of younger animals on deck, and perhaps even a few eggs (although that's less likely) Also, I read that it is also possible that a large majority of earth's aquatic life simply stayed in the water. A huge flood wouldn't neccesarily kill off everything just perhaps freshwater or saltwater, depending on the saline concentration of the giant ocean. In that case, I'm sure that there was some form of measure taken for one group or the other.

Actually, this just occurred to me, I wonder if there is a precise contentration of salt in water that allows for both fresh and saltwater life to survive, but I'm not a marine biologist, so that's just a thought.
Author:  Jenny [ Tue Jun 20, 2006 1:00 am ]
Post subject: 
i tend to lean in the direction of the Noah's Ark tale being a myth based on a major flood localized in one area. Chances are it was glorified to sound world wide, but in the days that it was written people's grasp of just how big the world actually was was a tad skewed. The world for them would be like.. their half of the continent at most. So if you had two of each animal from a smaller area, the task of keeping them alive and healthy on a boat for 150 days would be much more manageable and conceivable.
Author:  HHFOV [ Thu Jun 22, 2006 1:41 am ]
Post subject: 
Is homosexuality...wrong? I mean, the bible says that you ought not lay with another man, but some people are born like that. What are they supposed to do?
Author:  Douglas [ Thu Jun 22, 2006 1:59 am ]
Post subject: 
extremejon09 wrote:
2 of every animal?! How could there be a ship that could hold that much?


Well, for one thing, the ark was huge. And also, it was 2 of every kind, which, in Biblical terms, means the same as us saying "dog" to mean anything from a St. Bernard or a Chihuahua. So, there were 2 general types of dogs, 2 general types of cats, 2 general types of snakes, and so on. All the diversity came from the different breeding after that.

Hopefully that makes sense.
Author:  Didymus [ Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:15 am ]
Post subject: 
HipHoppityFrogOfValue wrote:
Is homosexuality...wrong? I mean, the bible says that you ought not lay with another man, but some people are born like that. What are they supposed to do?

First of all, the Scriptures teach that we are all born sinners (Psalm 51:5). So, in a very real sense, "I was born that way," isn't really a good excuse for any of us.
Author:  HHFOV [ Thu Jun 22, 2006 8:07 pm ]
Post subject: 
Didymus wrote:
HipHoppityFrogOfValue wrote:
Is homosexuality...wrong? I mean, the bible says that you ought not lay with another man, but some people are born like that. What are they supposed to do?

First of all, the Scriptures teach that we are all born sinners (Psalm 51:5). So, in a very real sense, "I was born that way," isn't really a good excuse for any of us.

Yes, but I'm still confused, and you didn't exactly answer my question. And,
how is that not a good excuse? How can you take blame for things beyond your control? Why should you be punished for a bad hand that fate dealt you? It just seems to me that God's infinite compassion wouldn't punish you for something that you didn't exactly...do, and wasn't your fault. Do you see where I'm going with this?
Author:  Didymus [ Thu Jun 22, 2006 8:53 pm ]
Post subject: 
I see where you're going, Frog, but I still think you're missing the point. Saying that we're born into sin is not the same as saying we're not responsible for our sin. We are. I'm just pointing out that that is no more or less true when the sin in question is homosexuality: God still considers it sin and holds people accountable for it, just as he holds every other sin in contempt.

But for everyone, there is only one escape from the penalty of sin at all, and that's through the sacrificial death of our Lord Jesus Christ. There is no other way.

While I can appreciate your struggle with this issue, my advice to you would be the same I would give Fred Phelps if opportunity presented itself: examine your own life, look and see where you, too, have failed God. And when you get hold of that, let it drive you to the cross, the only place where forgiveness can be found for any sin.
Author:  Froon [ Wed Jul 05, 2006 7:29 pm ]
Post subject: 
First post.

I would never have guessed that what started as a quick check to check out what this forum was like would have led me to viewing such intelligent conversation about Christian Faith.

Anyway, I have a few questions about the bible that I have never been able to find answers to:

First off, Heaven being 'upwards', I am quite certain it is recorded in the Gospels that Jesus visibly ascended to heaven, moving upwards through the clouds. Also, the story of the Tower of Babel, as I understand it, has God stop mankind from building a tower that upon construction would have meant that we could achieve anything (a bridge between Heaven and Earth possibly). My point is, we have sent men to the moon (in the event you believe this to be a hoax, we have still placed satellites in geo-synchronous orbit around Earth), so why did Jesus visibly ascend, and what issue did God have with Mankind building a big tower, considering present day achievements exceed this.

Next, from what I have read throughout this thread, it seems that some events in Genesis are not to be taken literally and should be considered poetic in nature. Why does that not allow for a creation to start with a big bang around 10 billion years ago with a small amount of Divine Intervention here and there to get life started and to put humanity on the right track?

I must say that I am impressed that many of the previous questions are answered so intelligently, I was half expecting the standard "Because the Bible says so, and the Bible is the word of God, which therefore must be absolute fact" type arguments.

Thank you in advance.
Author:  ed 'lim' smilde [ Wed Jul 05, 2006 7:50 pm ]
Post subject: 
Froon wrote:
what issue did God have with Mankind building a big tower, considering present day achievements exceed this.
At that time, God commanded everyone to spread accross the earth and increase in number. They built the Tower of Babel so that they could all be centered in one place and the builders could make a name for themselves (so they'd admire themselves instead of God's creation). Now, I guess we are about as spread out across the earth as we can possibly be, so that command isn't a big deal anymore.
Author:  Eldiran [ Wed Jul 05, 2006 8:45 pm ]
Post subject: 
Welcome to the forums, Froon. Enjoy your stay.

Froon wrote:
Next, from what I have read throughout this thread, it seems that some events in Genesis are not to be taken literally and should be considered poetic in nature. Why does that not allow for a creation to start with a big bang around 10 billion years ago with a small amount of Divine Intervention here and there to get life started and to put humanity on the right track?


It does allow for that. Most Christians object mainly to the idea that the Big Bang/Evolution all happened as a product of chance. The chance factor is typically a major part of the theories, hence many Christians' dislike of the ideas. With divine guidance, however, they both seem plausible.
Author:  racerx_is_alive [ Wed Jul 05, 2006 9:24 pm ]
Post subject: 
Froon wrote:
First off, Heaven being 'upwards', I am quite certain it is recorded in the Gospels that Jesus visibly ascended to heaven, moving upwards through the clouds. Also, the story of the Tower of Babel, as I understand it, has God stop mankind from building a tower that upon construction would have meant that we could achieve anything (a bridge between Heaven and Earth possibly). My point is, we have sent men to the moon (in the event you believe this to be a hoax, we have still placed satellites in geo-synchronous orbit around Earth), so why did Jesus visibly ascend, and what issue did God have with Mankind building a big tower, considering present day achievements exceed this.


I guess my first thought is that of course it's above the earth. Otherwise it is on the earth or inside of the earth. If that's the case, where was heaven before the earth was created?

Now, how high above the earth? I seriously doubt any Tower of Babel builders would have ran into a glass ceiling, broken through and found heaven. My interpretation of the Tower of Babel has a little twist on the common interpretation that you present. My understanding is that the Tower of Babel wasn't an effort to try and physically reach heaven through altitude. Otherwise, wouldn't they have started building on the top of a mountain or something? They were trying to build a way to get into heaven, but it was through more spiritual means. I believe that they were trying to build a counterfeit temple for their false religion. It was attempt to try and get into heaven against God's will by making fakes of what God had revealed to his actual followers. They were making a mockery of God's power and authority by claiming that they could fake it well enough to get into heaven, no matter what God says.

So building a tower to get into heaven wasn't so much a matter of altitude as it was of attitude.
Author:  The Experimental Film [ Wed Jul 05, 2006 9:27 pm ]
Post subject:  hoo
racerx_is_alive wrote:
So building a tower to get into heaven wasn't so much a matter of altitude as it was of attitude.

Ohohoho. Did you make that one up, or did you hear it elsewhere?
Author:  racerx_is_alive [ Wed Jul 05, 2006 9:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: hoo
The Experimental Film wrote:
racerx_is_alive wrote:
So building a tower to get into heaven wasn't so much a matter of altitude as it was of attitude.

Ohohoho. Did you make that one up, or did you hear it elsewhere?

I'm not sure, but I'm feeling a little mocked here. Honestly though, I guess I should just be more careful when I type things that sound 'clever.' But yeah, I made it up myself.
Author:  ed 'lim' smilde [ Wed Jul 05, 2006 9:39 pm ]
Post subject: 
I doubt TEF was mocking you. I thought it was very clever... It even works in Spanish.
Author:  Capt. Ido Nos [ Wed Jul 05, 2006 9:41 pm ]
Post subject: 
Froon wrote:
Next, from what I have read throughout this thread, it seems that some events in Genesis are not to be taken literally and should be considered poetic in nature. Why does that not allow for a creation to start with a big bang around 10 billion years ago with a small amount of Divine Intervention here and there to get life started and to put humanity on the right track?


Well, there is some dissagreement still between people on how literal the creation story should be taken, and just how it took place. Here in forumopolis we have personal beliefs ranging from the atheistic world view that encompases the Big Bang and evolution to the literal Christian viewpoint of "Let there be light" and creation, as well as numerous shades of gray in between. For the sake of this thread, I won't delve too deeply into this, but I will say that I personally believe in the literal creation, as I have yet to find enough evidence to support evolution. Plus, one one has to be careful when one tries to say how God would have created the universe, as it can easily lead you down a dangerous path of making up a God to suit your own wants. There's some good stuff going on in this thread right now, if you want to check that out ;)
Author:  Ju Ju Master [ Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: hoo
racerx_is_alive wrote:
The Experimental Film wrote:
racerx_is_alive wrote:
So building a tower to get into heaven wasn't so much a matter of altitude as it was of attitude.

Ohohoho. Did you make that one up, or did you hear it elsewhere?

I'm not sure, but I'm feeling a little mocked here. Honestly though, I guess I should just be more careful when I type things that sound 'clever.' But yeah, I made it up myself.


I agree with ed, he wasn't mocking you. I too thought it was clever.
Page 5 of 17 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/