That’s brilliant. Too bad you weren’t around to correct Einstein and Bohr from coming to their erroneous conclusions.

And this is a major point for me. If it is so critical and paramount that we have a relationship with and believe in a God, why has he made himself so absent and unprovable? It doesn’t make any sense…unless he doesn’t exist.

Damn straight. Exactly.

I think a genuine knowledge about the world – and the information explosion – will cause more people to drift from their faiths than anything else. Faith in something not seen doesn’t work when what you can see contradicts that faith.

Anyway. 2 Peter always bothered me to. It was always ironic that Peter says we have everything we need for life and godliness.

Before the New Testament was complete.

Before the canon was nailed down.

Then believers today say we need the whole New Testament. And the canon is locked down.

Odd.

Doesn’t that contradict what Peter says?

I don’t think conservative Christianity can answer those objections. That’s why so many of us drift liberal… and on and out…

2 Peter 3:9 bothers me for the same reason:
“The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.’

Really? Cause I’m pretty sure we’ve had a population explosion these last 100 years or so…

More people die every day without ever having any access to God’s Word than are ever saved to a particular sect in the same time. How can anyone say God has a message to give if the message always depends on human transmitters who cannot possibly transmit this message to people at a rate anywhere near the rate at which people die?

One would hope God’s communication of His message would be better than mere human invention (printing press, internet, radio, tv, etc…. all invented over a thousand years after the message was supposedly first handed to the saints). What a horrible message.

Then you have to consider the secularization of nations and the constant generational shifts. If God has a message and must fairly communicate it… then we’d better start over in Europe again… blast. By then America will be secularized and we’ll have to come back over here.

[Boy, Jesus will never come back because so many tribes and nations are being created every generation that saving people from them is just going to get impossible!]

Why not just say that all divine messages are human inventions transmitted by human messengers with human motives and human limitations and human error?

Looks exactly like Christianity to me!

My point was not that the concept was wrong, just that if it were true, there would be a clear set of rules we are supposed to follow. Look around. Is there?

The Bible isn’t clear to me. It looks exactly like humans making rules and saying God gave them.

So if the theory is correct, then I would expect these rules would be out there somewhere for all to have access. But they aren’t, so the theory must not be correct.

The debate over whether or not God is morally justified in holding us responsible to his rules is somewhat a periphery issue to me.

And just to clarify, I’m not trying to argue for God’s existence. That would be stupid on this site, and it’s not something I’m interested in anyway. I don’t know if he exists, but I’m pretty sure there would be no way of proving it if he did.