Literary Aspects of the Bible

by kreitsauce on Feb.07, 2009, under Bible, Doctrine, Philosophy

Hi! If you are new here, you might might want to subscribe to the RSS feed by clicking the icon to the left. If you like what you see, feel free to leave a comment or email/share a link here using the "Share/Save" button below each article. Thanks for visiting!

In this post I’ll be directly replying to Nitwit Nastik’s blog article “Errors, Inconsistencies, and Contradictions in the Bible.” (Nitwit and I have a fairly cordial friendship going, so please don’t see this as my attempt to tear him to shreds. You’ll have to read through both our blogs to see that we have had a number of conversations concerning faith.) His basic assumption in this article is that the Bible contains a number of “contradictions and factual or scientific errors.” I call this an assumption because he doesn’t actually list any errors, but rather critiques the responses of Christians when confronted with these so-called errors.

The first response by Christians that he critiques is the use of literary techniques to explain verses in the Bible. Apparently, the use of metaphor and symbolism in Scripture is problematic for Nitwit, who seems to prefer a more “literal” interpretation of Scripture. He goes so far, in fact, as to describe an appeal to the poetic nature of Scripture as “deceptive.”

In order to understand Scripture, we must understand that it is a book of ancient literature. As such, it makes use of a variety of literary types such as proverb, saying, chronicle, lament psalm, oracle, apocalypse, parable, song, epistle, and many others. (For those interested, I highly recommend Leland Ryken’s books How to Read the Bible as Literature and The Complete Literary Guide to the Bible.) On the subject of literary technique, Ryken writes:

“Virtually every page of the Bible is replete with literary technique, and to possess the individual texts fully, we need to read the Bible as literature, just as we need to read it theologically and (in the narrative parts) historically.

“The importance of genre to biblical interpretation is that genres have their own methods of procedure and rules of interpretation. An awareness of genre should alert us to what we can expect to find in a text. Additionally, considerations of genre should govern the terms in which we interact with a text. With narrative, e.g., we are on the right track if we pay attention to plot, setting, and character. If the text before us is a satire, we need to think in terms of object of attack, the satiric vehicle in which the attack is couched, and satiric norm (stated or implied standard by which the criticism is being conducted).

“In view of how many literary genres are present in the Bible, it is obvious that the overall literary form of the Bible is the anthology, as even the word Bible (Gk. biblia, “books”) hints. As an anthology, the Bible possesses the same kinds of unity that other anthologies exhibit: multiple authorship (approximately three dozen authors), diverse genres, a rationale for collecting these particular materials (a unifying religious viewpoint and story of salvation history), comprehensiveness, and an identifiable strategy of organization (a combination of historical chronology and groupings by genre).”

One would expect literary complexity in the Word of God. One would expect literary complexity in any religious book. It shouldn’t surprise us, then, that parallelism, foreshadowing, metaphor, simile, symbolism, etc. should appear throughout the Bible. It is the logical result of a Creative Mind guiding other creative minds to write.

Now, I must be clear here. Biblical Christianity has always believed in a literal, grammatical, historical interpretation of Scripture. We do believe in a literal interpretation of Scripture. That means that we believe that some Scripture literally makes use of literary techniques. We also believe in comparing Scripture with Scripture to determine Its true meaning. These principles are both practical and logical.

Nitwit correctly asserts that anything can be given a metaphorical meaning, and he uses The Matrix and The Lord of the Rings as examples. I would like to make a few statements as a way of wrapping up the post:

I find it a bit ironic that The Matrix and The Lord of the Rings themselves both make use of allusion, metaphor, and symbolism throughout, frequently in referencing Christianity. The Matrix references Christianity (Zion, Trinity, etc.) throughout, and Tolkien himself explained that Eru is a fictionalized version of God.
If modern books and movies use literary techniques, why is it so difficult to believe that the Bible would?
In the works mentioned above, we can turn to either the author or the author’s works to figure out what the literary techniques used are meant to represent. When we read the Bible, we do the same thing. We turn to the Author in prayer and further study His Word to determine the correct interpretation.

1 Peter 1:20-21: “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

:agnosticism, Apologetics, Atheism, Bible, Bible Study, christianity, Education, God, jesus, KJV, literary techniques, literature, metaphor, religion, sacred, symbolism, truth, Worldview

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

36 Comments for this entry

nitwitnastik
February 8th, 2009 on 10:47 am
Kreit,
First, let me say that I like the new design of your blog…it’s pretty cool. Frankly I think that a white background is much easier on the eyes than a black one

Secondly, I don’t mind if you tear my logic to shreds. Thats fine with me. Heck I want others to poke holes in my logic as much as they can. I may look foolish or even embarrased but at the end of the day I will come out a more knowledgable person and a winner as I’ll have a better understanding about my thoughts.

3rdly, I am not sure if you were too disgusted to read my entire post but I *did* provide links to a comprehensive list of errors and contradictions in the Bible at the end of my post. I myself had found quite a few errors and contradictions but when I searched on the net I came across lots of links which actually were much more comprehensive and much better than mine. So I decided to avoid redundancies and go with the better ones.

As for the rest of the post, you are exactly making my point that Christains use their logic to pick and choose which verses to be taken literally and which to take metaphorically. That’s what I am pointing out. The fact that someone can come up with a reason to justify something is no proof that it is true or correct. How are Christians so sure that their version of the literary techniques are correct and not the one by Atheists.

Btw, as for movies using literary techniques goes, we don’t call movies as word of God. They are works of art and not divine truths.

As for Matrix and LOTR you just supported my point without maybe realizing it. That was exactly my point. Just as the writers of these stories interpreted the Bible in their own way givng it their own meaning and interpretation something other than exactly what the Bible says, (I used to derive and invent metaphorical meanings from buddhist philosophy in Matrix wen I was still a believer) anyone can have their own metaphorical meanings and symbolism invented from the Bible according to their predilection. But that is just their interpretation and opinion not necessarily the fact or truth

In fact metaphorical meanings and symbolism can be invented by anyone in everything. It totally depends on the person. I can find metaphorical meanings in any of my physics or engineering text book if I want to but that wouldn’t make it correct or true. My point is that given there is no established method to decide which verse is to take literally and which to be taken metaphorically, how can Christians be so absloutely sure that the metaphorical meaning is the correct interpretation of that verse?

Reply
kreitsauce
February 8th, 2009 on 2:07 pm
Lol, I changed designs because the dark design was so hard on my eyes, so I know what you’re saying. I figured if I was already dealing with eye strain, I might as well not encourage the advent of reading glasses through my own blog!

I did read the whole article, and I did note the websites with the “errors” listed on them. I was just letting my readers know that I wasn’t going to be writing a defense of the Scripture directly, nor did I want them to think that you were directly listing any apparent errors in your posting.

It isn’t correct to say that Christians pick and choose which verses to take figuratively. It is through an understanding of the different genres of biblical literature that we know how to take verses. We can also know this by comparing Scripture with Scripture. We can ask what the verses mean in context, how it fits in with the whole. I don’t struggle with my understanding of To Kill a Mockingbird, The Scarlet Letter, LOTR, or even The Matrix because I understand the flow of thought and the purpose of each of these works.

Scripture may be a revelation of God as far as its purpose goes, but it is a written revelation, a work of art in the literary sense. The movies and books we have both mentioned are works of art as far as their nature goes, but they are not works of art in their purpose. They each communicate the thoughts of the authors. They don’t exist to reveal the mind of God to us.

Furthermore, they do not attempt to interpret the Bible per se; they merely use Biblical imagery to enhance the narrative. It is one thing for me to watch The Matrix and “read into” it and find my own religious beliefs reflected. Christians (and most folks) do this on a regular basis. That’s how we get articles and books titled “Finding God in Harry Potter.” It’s quite a different thing for an author or producer to use specifically Biblical terminology (Trinity, Zion, etc.) in his works or to specifically write of his “fictionalization” of the Judeo-Christian God (as with Tolkien.) They are referencing the Bible, not interpreting it.

The whole point of my post was that we can know what the Bible is saying, and there is very little room for variety in Biblical interpretation. Our interpretations must be literal. They must fit in with the historical, grammatical, and literary context. They must fit in with the Bible as a whole. This means that we can be absolutely certain of which interpretation is correct. There is very little “wiggle room” in Scripture.

I’ll be adding posts along these lines on a fairly regular basis. no doubt we’ll have the chance to talk some more in the future.

Cheers!

Reply
tpitts
February 8th, 2009 on 8:29 pm
Good day,

When one speaks of understanding the Bible, I believe that 1Corinthians chapter 2 sheds some light on the subject. Verse 10 says that God has revealed himself to us through His Spirit. Also, verse 14 shows why it is possible for some to understand the scriptures and not for others.

1Co_2:14, But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

The natural man refers to him that is still dead in trespass and sin and not excepted Christ as Saviour. However, those that are saved can discern the scriptures through the Spirit of God which has indwelt them.

Because I have the Spirit in me I am able to communicate with the author of the Bible and He can lead me in what is being said. Writing is a form of communication and it is always easier to communicate with someone you know than a stranger.

I agree that looking at the scriptures in the proper historical and literary settings will help in learning and understanding them. However, if you wish to truly have the scripture revealed to you you must repent and be born again.

I realize that I may be criticized for using the Bible to prove/defend the Bible, but if the answer is contained there-in I do not believe I need to get help from Hollywood or secular authors.

Reply
kreitsauce
February 8th, 2009 on 8:43 pm
I don’t think there’s any problem at all with using the Bible to prove/defend Itself. Who knows a book better than the author of the book? If God tells us in one part of the Bible that there is a requirement for truly understanding His Word, why would I doubt Him? Understanding the history and literature of the Bible is helpful and an interesting study (at least for those of us who are nerds), but knowing God Himself is essential.

Reply
tpitts
February 8th, 2009 on 8:56 pm
You and I are in agreement on this. It is mostly those who do not understand the working of the Holy Spirit in you that do not understand this concept. I have many co-workers who ask me questions about my faith then want me to defend it without the Bible. I find this ludicrous. That is like going to guns for dummies to find out if it really shoots when the logical thing to do is pull the trigger. Using the gun itself to prove it is a gun and that is what you believe about it and what it will do.

Keep up the Good work.

P.S. One got saved at the prison tonight.

Reply
kreitsauce
February 8th, 2009 on 9:05 pm
Haha, I’m going to have to remember the “guns for dummies” thing. That’s pretty funny, yet it makes a good point.

It’s good to hear that the Lord is at work in prison. I hear it’s one of His favorite places to work (Book of Acts). So when are you going to start a blog of your own?

Reply
nitwitnastik
February 8th, 2009 on 10:35 pm
@tpitts

your analogy is flawed. In fact you ‘guns for dummies’ analogy just proves the point that you cannot learn tangible experiences from fairy tales in this case our life experiences cannot be learnt from a book. All you need to do to learn about leading your life is to use your brains and think carefully every decision. You don’t need a ‘life for dummies’ book to tell you how to lead your life. I guess you never thought your analogy through.

Also when you are using the bible to justify claims in the bible you are using circular reasoning to prove your point..That’s a logical fallacy. It’s like saying

“I am a genius”
How do you know you are a genius ?
“My webpage says so”
Why should we believe your webpage
“It’s because it was designed by a genius like me”

Just because your answer seems witty doesn’t make it correct. So please think before you say something.

Reply
tpitts
February 9th, 2009 on 6:22 am
I doubt I have the intelligence to set up something of this magnitude. I find I prefer to let the experts like you do the heavy lifting then I can just comment. I can’t even figure out how to put the little picture icon in the corner of the name box like your little thinking man.

I was also informed that I have a very boring screen name. If I can’t gain interest in that then imagine how boring the rest would be.

Reply
kreitsauce
February 9th, 2009 on 7:11 am
Nitwit,
If you’ll look at my MTV posting, you’ll find that I posit that we learn about life through books, movies, and music all the time. It’s that whole shared experience thing. You’ve made the leap to calling the Bible “fairy tales”, but fairy tales rarely attempt to explain the existence of the eternal or cause their reader to get to know the author.

Also, for the believer, the Book is already proven by faith so that we don’t need outside evidence. It is there, but that is not the focus of our faith.

Anyway, I think that the analogy is quite fitting. If I have a gun, I can test it out by pulling the trigger a few times. This will tell me its power and whether or not the site is accurate, among other things. If I use the Bible and I find that it meets a deep spiritual need and its advice is infallible, I have reason to trust it. I have tested It, and I have found it true, so I do have reason to trust it.

Reply
nitwitnastik
February 9th, 2009 on 9:31 am
@kreit

I was referring to the ‘guns for dummies’ analogy of tpitts to show that things like morality are already in us and we don’t need to read books to understand it.

Any book which has talking snakes, talking bushes, talking donkeys and people coming back from the dead is a fairy tale in my dictionary. Yes aesop’s fables is also a fairy tales which teach us about moral behaviour. That doesn’t make them true. And Bible doesn’t teach us about the eternal becuase for that we have to assume that there IS an aternal and other than claiming there is..bible cannot prove it.

Faith cannot be used to prove anything because it contradicts the very definition of proof and a “testable hypthothesis”. if I don’t require external evidence I can believe anything on faith. If tomorrow someone says that he believes that Christianity is an evil cult and breeds hatred, racism, torture etc on FAITH. How will you convince him that it doesn’t. You can try to prove that it doesn’t by showing evidence ..right? but if that person refuses to believe your evidence becuase he/she knows it from “faith”. How are you going to convince him other than using emotional blackmail. Do you see the problem with faith now?

The analogy is flawed and contradictory, unless I misread the analogy, becuase tpitts says he/she doesn’t need a silly book to learn about how a gun works and yet tries to tell us that he/she uses a book to learn about life.

Btw the bible is not infallible in it’s advice as I have shown before. If you consider on faith there is nothing I can do to convince you otherwise just as you cannot convince the person that Christianity is not an evil cult.

Reply
kreitsauce
February 9th, 2009 on 10:59 am
Your primary issues seems to be with miracles and a lack of proof in Christianity. I think we’ve discussed these things before, but a quick recap:

1. Our ideas about how things work only come from observation. We don’t decide what can and cannot take place. If God chooses to do something, He isn’t breaking a law, He is only momentarily intervening in the natural order of things.

2. We cannot speak of absolute proof in any area except for mathematics. We can speak of evidences, but not proof.

3. The Bible can teach the eternal without proving its existence. If it did prove everything that it taught of, there would be no point to faith. I would have no choice but to believe.

4. As I said before, we don’t need outside evidence because we have already considered the Bible as an outsider and accepted it.

Ultimately, we all believe in something based on faith. I believe that something and Someone exists outside the physical realm. You believe that nothing and no one exists outside the physical realm. You have no proof, nor do I. That doesn’t mean that I don’t have evidence, though.

I’ll leave you and tpitts to argue about the analogy. I see the point, and I think it’s a great analogy.

Reply
nitwitnastik
February 9th, 2009 on 11:29 am
@ kreit

Observation is also evidence not faith, but where have we observed talking snakes and talking bushes?

OK if you accept the Bible on faith and also that there is something called eternal based only on faith , tell me something. If tomorrow an evil dictator comes to power in the US and decrees that based on his “faith” he knows that all Christians are evil and need to exterminated. How will you convince him that it is not the case (given that you are a nice guy and will not use violence but will only talk or write to him to convince him) ?

I never said it doesn’t exist, but the chance that it may not depending on lack of evidence. I am waitiing to be convinced if I can be shown tangible proof. I try not believing anything on faith. If I cannot use my 5 senses to judge it I typically hold off on my judgement but I don’t assert that it exists just becuase of lack of evidence.

Reply
kreitsauce
February 9th, 2009 on 11:45 am
Obviously someone witnessed a talking snake and a talking bush. I’m saying there has to be an openmindedness to say, “Maybe this did happen.” If you don’t at least have that, if you just dismiss the claims of Christianity as a fairy tale, then you’re no different from a Christian who refuses to answer you because he says your question is silly. You fail to consider God because you say His claims are silly.

If a dictator came to power that is as evil as you said, then he already has his faith. I couldn’t convince him by words, whether from the Bible or outside of the Bible. His mind is completely made up. If I took it upon myself to reason with him, I would give him the Bible and his need for salvation, and I would show him from outside the Bible the laws of our country and speak of human rights. If any chance existed for persuasion, I would have to use both.

You can’t forever live as if you don’t know. You won’t ever have proof that God and eternity do or don’t exist. You will only have your own judgment based on the evidence before you. To make no decision at all seems a worse thing than rejection of Christianity. The problem is that in not choosing, the choice has really already been made.

Reply
nitwitnastik
February 9th, 2009 on 12:08 pm
@kreit

Why is it “obvious” that someone witnessed it. I am open minded about it but I need plausible evidence ? Open mindedness doesn’t mean we accept things without plausible evidence which breaks the laws of nature.

So do you see the problem with faith. Showing this dictator anything be it the bible, laws, human rights etc is called evidence. But if he refuses to play by your evidence and only takes things on faith, all Christians are doomed to be exterminated anyway..right? Since you cannot convince him by words or evidence, what chance do you think anyone has of convincing any believer by logic and reason? What chance do you think anyone has of convincing an evil person of an evil deed if he refuses to see reason or logic and accepts everything on faith? Then the world is doomed anyway.

Reply
kreitsauce
February 9th, 2009 on 12:15 pm
The authors of the Bible present their narrative as a factual account, so you have to first evaluate whether or not it is historically accurate in what it describes. Since we know that it is accurate when describing known history, we must then consider whether or not the account is accurate when describing unknown history. If we believe in God and Satan, then nothing is more likely than Satan entering into a snake and speaking to it if he thinks he can cause the downfall of the human race. There is also nothing more likely than assuming that God would speak to His creation, even if His vessel (a burning bush) is an unlikely one. You reject the entire Bible wholesale based on a handful of “unbelievable” accounts when the majority of the Bible is filled with history, standards of right and wrong, etc. that are very acceptable and plausible. If it is right in so much, why not at least give the Bible the benefit of the doubt in areas that we must take by faith?

I see no problem with faith itself. What I see is a problem with the object of faith.

Reply
tpitts
February 9th, 2009 on 2:26 pm
That is quite a discussion you have going.

Nitwit, evidently I struck a nerve with the gun analogy. It sounds to me like you are anti-gun as well as anti-God. You also were unable to understand the simpleness of the analogy so I will attempt to explain it to you.

The point of the comparison was not using a reference book but proving something with itself. You can do the same thing with a botle of whiskey. I do not need to go to the distillery to prove what the bottle contains. Using the bottle and contents in the bottle I can prove that it is alcohol, and will make me drunk.

Insert a motor vehicle into the same analogy. To find out if it runs and how well it runs the best way is to use the vehicle. I prove the value of the car by using the car.

Secondly, you say that you can not use faith to prove the accuracy of something. However, you use faith all the time and do not even realize it. The first time you sit down in a chair that you have never seen you have faith it will hold you up, even though you know nothing of the manufacurer or material. I submit, the more you use the chair then the more that your faith becomes fact. It is the same with the Bible, the more you use it the more it becomes fact over faith.

From what I have read of your writings I do not know if you are an atheist or an agnostic but you sound as if you believe there is no God. Either belief takes more faith than Christianity.

To be an atheist and say there is no God then you are saying that you know 100 percent of everything there is to know about everything. If you do not know everything then you have to admit there is room for God in the area you lack knowledge. However, you would have to admit having a lack of knowledge in an area.

I appreciate the response to my analogy but I would caution you to think before posting an insulting comment when you are in fact the one in error.

Good Day

Reply
nitwitnastik
February 10th, 2009 on 11:51 pm
@tpitts

Yes, great. How am in error again? pray tell me. Now that you have realized that you are in error, you feign insult and turn the tables and say that I am in error. If you feel insulted at people pointing out problems with your logic, maybe it’s better that you do not be participate in any debate. I can also feel insulted by your “fool” comment earlier but I will ignore it for the time being.

You keep proving my point. The Bible can at best provide some guidelines but the best way to learn about life is to direct experience and critical thinking. The bible is not infallible and as such cannot be used as a perfect guide.

I do not use faith to prove the accuracy of anything. When I am unsure I call it a possibility but I do not arrogantly claim that I am 100% certain that it is the only possibility like most believers do about God. Btw, please don’t assume anything or put words in my mouth. Not believing in God is not about faith it is about lack of proof. I am an agnostic and I believe that there is no god only to the extent that there are no fairies or unicorns

Your chair analogy is again off base. the reasons are below
1. I do not blindly sit on anything if I don’t know what it is.
2. I have enough evidence from previous experiences of sitting on a chair that 99% of the time it holds up but in the case of God there is not a shred of evidence except for some one’s words.
3. Faith is believing something without evidence. Here my evidence is previous experiences and my 5 senses which I use to navigate the world around me. That can hardly be called faith.
4. I disagree with your “more you use the bible” comment – how does using something more make it a fact other than someone convincing himself/herself it is true.

In fact there is hardly anything we do in this world which is based on total blind faith, except for believing in God.

Reply
kreitsauce
February 11th, 2009 on 12:24 am
Some faiths are blind, but that is not true of the Christian faith. Some faith requires no evidence (such as unicorns or fairies), but not real faith. Christians are neither blind nor witless. We began as people unconvinced. We looked at the Bible, and asked ourselves if it was logical and if it held answers we were looking for. By our estimations, we liked what we saw and believed it to be true. Even this bit of openmindedness which we call faith required some evidence, and it was tested by life experience.

When we find that we can indeed experience a new life in Christ, we learned to trust Him more. It is faith based on experience, much like your own version of the chair analogy. That is how a person grows in faith. They use it, and experience tells them that God works. I suspect that if you were openminded enough to give Christ a chance, you might find Christianity much more reasonable than you do right now.

I say this with all sincerity. We’ve strongly debated here, but I would love for you to come to know what I know now. I see a designer world that is discoverable by mankind- no coincidence. I see a world that is expressible by mathematical equations- no coincidence. I read a book that has a logical flow, is reasonable, is practical, and is without error. It tells me of things that I instinctively know in my own heart and mind- right vs. wrong, historical facts, etc. Based on the truth of the falsifiable claims and the inherent logic of the Bible, I have evidence that the Bible is true concerning things I cannot perceive with the five senses. Having accepted Christ on this basis, I find that my experience as a Christian has been a wonderful one, one that I wouldn’t trade for all the wealth in the world. This faith isn’t blind, friend. I hope and pray that it may one day be yours.

Reply
nitwitnastik
February 11th, 2009 on 1:30 am
faith is faith..there is no true faith or false faith. I don’t see any difference betwen god and fairies. If I want I can attribute everything God does to fairies and no one will be able to tell the difference.

What you think about Christianity and speak with such conviction is exactly the same what muslims or hindus think and say about their faith. I am sure, had you been born in Saudi arabia or India and had studied the Quran or the Gita all your life and spent so much energy and emotion defending, you would have said the same thing about those other religions. How is that most people who are born to a faith find that faith to be the only true faith?

The difference between my chair experience and your God experience is that mine depends on direct verifiable evidence but God has no direct verifiable evidence and I trust this method more than faith.

Thanks for your prayers my friend but it is futile I am afraid. You forget that I studied Christianity for 13 years and still wasn’t attracted to it. I was once a devout person who believed in everything you believe, prayed hours every day and did all the things believers do but once I started reasoning, I realized how foolish I was. I have studied other religions extensively and have similar feelings about them. There is nothing in Christianity that is not in Hindusim or Buddism (unfortunately I don’t have even that much respect for Islam).

Frankly, as long as you do work for humanity and care for humans and do not kill, torture or coerce others to believe what you believe, I cannot care less what you believe in (even fairies are Ok with me ). If you find your experience as a christian a wonderful one, I am happy for you but I can assure you that my experiences as an agnostic is no less fulfilling and liberating.

Reply
tpitts
February 11th, 2009 on 7:03 am
Nitwit, I love a good debate and am not offended or insulted in any way. Evidently you have a hard time with my posts either in comprehension or language and for this I apologize. I looked back and did not see where I called anybody a fool. The only time I would use the word fool is to quote the Bible which defines a fool as someone who says in their heart there is no God.

You always go back to logic and reasoning to tear apart Christianity, faith and the Bible. The problem with logic is that it is inconsistent from person to person and culture to culure. Some cultures believe it logical to attempt to kill the enemy, others wish to be diplomatic. Some people feel if a woman gets pregnant out of wed lock that abortion is the only option, others believe the sanctity of life is the logical course of action.
How a person experiences something or comes to a conclusion about something is heavily influenced by traditon, religion, social environment and upbringing.

You say that you are best able to judge something through experience thus I provide you a challenge. Start attending a Bible believing church on a regular basis, truly study the Bible and the promises that it has to offer instead of getting hung-up on what you see as errors and contradictions. Truly experience the things surrounding Christianity. My hope and prayer, if you do this, is you will come to the realization of a Mighty God who provided us with His Word, the Bible, and from His Word you will find love and salvation in Jesus Christ.

Reply
kreitsauce
February 11th, 2009 on 7:14 am
Ah, but your direct verifiable evidence only takes place when you first exercise some faith. You have to first believe that it’s worth a shot to sit down in the chair. Not all faiths are equal. I have faith that my wife loves me even though love is an abstract concept. I cannot directly test or measure that love with the five senses. I must believe that she loves me because she tells me and she demonstrates that love. However, there’s nothing empirical about my belief that she loves me. It is a type of faith, but it is faith based on reason and experience. Belief in fairies, on the other hand, is not reasonable, logical, directly or indirectly observable, or experiential. It is truly blind faith. Christian faith is more like faith in my wife’s love than belief in fairies.

Reply
nitwitnastik
February 11th, 2009 on 9:17 am
@tpitts

Yes, that’s was an implicit hint and I could’ve taken it otherwise too and felt insulted, but instead I let it go.

Logic is the only way we distinguish between good and bad and we do it all the time. Show me one culture which considers killing, just for the sake of killing, good using logic unless influenced by religion. Please send me proof and I will check it out. yes logic can vary but so can religion. Every person adopts religion according to traditon, social environment and upbringing.

Religion tells muslim that it is OK to kill non-believers, religion tells christians that its ok to kill people if that person works on the day of sabbath, however logic tells people that if a person has spent 20 years as a vegetable, euthanasia is probably a better option. Now you compare these three and tell me which is a more logical.

As I told kreit before, I attended A methodist school and church for 13 years and studied the bible for more than 13 years. I even took exams on the Bible. So I have already seen the other side and believe me this side is much greener. So here is my challenge to you.

Try reading the God delusion by Richard Dawkins, Why I am not a Christian by Betrand Russell, letter to a christian nation by sam harris, atheist universe by david mills, god is not great by Christopher hitchens or other books…watch the atheist vs theist debates on google videos, watch the talks of these previous authors,attend an atheist/rationalist group meeting regularly or read atheist blogs like pharyngula or richarddawkins.net and then compare religion with atheism. Maybe then you will find love and salvation too in the freedom that comes from not believing in invisible friends.

@Kreit
You just proved the point that love maybe abstract but we do verify it before we claim that someone loves us, through direct evidence. So once we get evidence that’s not faith anymore. My wife’s love can be directly verified as you said by what she says, how she behaves and with our 5 senses, isn’t that direct evidence? I will not think that she still loves me if she behaves otherwise or leaves me for someone. That’s direct verifiable evidence and not faith. But for God and fairies I cannot do that.

Reply
kreitsauce
February 11th, 2009 on 9:56 am
But you still cannot actually verify the existence of or quantify that love. You must simply believe it exists. A man’s wife may feign love for one reason or another. You must believe it based on evidence. As I stated before, the absence of a deity does not explain an orderly universe, does not explain dna (information), does not explain an observable universe, and it does not explain a universe in which physical interaction may be expressible mathematically. Our universe is proof positive of God’s existence. The Bible is the mind of God. We except these things as evidence for His existence. If you choose to not believe in Him, you must still explain how all of these things came to be without Him.

Reply
nitwitnastik
February 11th, 2009 on 10:43 am
If you want to believe that a deity did all these and explain things that way I cannot stop you from doing it, but as for me I don’t.
However I find it amazing that we humans have achieved so much wihout God telling us how or explaining things (Bible doesn’t talk or explain dna, quantum physics or mathematics)

Reply
kreitsauce
February 11th, 2009 on 12:01 pm
How else do you explain the things that I listed? Things that are not alive don’t create life. Things that have no intelligence do not produce intelligence.

Because God created this universe and formed us to learn about it and Him, He gave us the abilities to learn about the world around us. We didn’t learn things without Him; we learned things because of Him.

Reply
nitwitnastik
February 11th, 2009 on 1:32 pm
For that logic to hold we have to assume there IS an intelligence. You assert that there is such an intelligence. I cannot make that assertion based on lack of evidence. I hold off on that judgement and I don’t think that affects how I lead my life in any way. I am willing to change my mind if I am shown verifiable evidence (which does not include the Bible or any holy book)

Reply
kreitsauce
February 11th, 2009 on 1:38 pm
No, I DEDUCE the existence of an intelligence based on the fact that our world seems to be perfectly designed. I DEDUCE the existence of an INTELLIGENCE because only intelligence can share information in the DNA. There is no other explanation other than an Intelligence. I don’t have to assume anything to make that statement.

Reply
nitwitnastik
February 11th, 2009 on 2:15 pm
I think “perfection” is again an assumption. How do you define perfection? How do you know that the world is perfectly designed. How can we be so sure that, had the world been different from what we see today it would have been imperfect? Does the existence of human life make anything perfect?

Reply
kreitsauce
February 11th, 2009 on 3:14 pm
By “perfectly” I mean that our universe is designed to permit the existence of human life, and to allow that life to flourish. If you read through some of my past articles, you’ll see quotes from very Darwinian scientists who say that our world appears very designed. That coupled with the very existence of DNA, which is extraordinarily complex and contains massive amounts of information, makes it very easy to deduce a Designer, Someone Who “thought” of the information necessary for life. Or consider the complexity of the cell. There is no other way to explain where all of this complexity, design, and information came from.

Reply
nitwitnastik
February 11th, 2009 on 3:33 pm
So anything which allows human life is perfect? Isn’t that changing the question to prove the answer ?

There are probably millions of planets where there is no life. So is 1 in a a million a good probability for anything.

If the omniscient or omnipotent God was so intelligent why did it take millions of years for him to create humans? What was he waiting so long for?

Reply
kreitsauce
February 11th, 2009 on 4:05 pm
A “solution” that leaves an intelligent cause out of the picture isn’t a solution at all. You’re missing the point, which is that everything from the atom, to the cell, to the galaxy needed a guiding and creative Intelligence to come together. A universe with life in it does exist. We can argue about why God did something the way He did it at another time, but saying that God should have done something better or differently doesn’t remove the fact that we have a universe at all.

Reply
nitwitnastik
February 11th, 2009 on 4:28 pm
You assume that there is an intelligent design and believe in intelligent designer. I don’t. I understand how probability works and I believe in chance over billions and billions of iterations. Let us agree to disagree on that.

Reply
kreitsauce
February 11th, 2009 on 4:42 pm
I can agree to disagree, but there is a fundamental difference of worldviews that will make any future discussion ultimately unresolvable. I would suggest that your worldview lacks a “probable cause” and needs revision, as time is not a sufficient explanation for order, complexity, or information in our world.

Reply
nitwitnastik
February 11th, 2009 on 4:54 pm
I do not throw away God entirely just as you throw away chance entirely. I just say that probability makes more sense to me and probability and chance *IS* a probable cause just as God. Do you agree that there is a slight chance that probability *may* be the reason for all this complexity? If not then I agree this is unresolvable.

Reply
kreitsauce
February 11th, 2009 on 5:02 pm
I believe that I would have to assume the eternality of the material universe in order to say that there was a probability for the physical universe to come into existence.

I do not see any probable chance for life to come from something that isn’t alive, or from intelligence to come from something that lacks the apparatus for intelligence.

Reply
tpitts
February 12th, 2009 on 6:58 am
Nitwit,
I realize this is out of order with the current string between you and Kreit, but if I tried to keep up with a conversation, in this format, for that long, it would be the only thing I would accomplish.

I am familiar with the atheist/agnostic viewpoint and have studied it enough to realize it takes more faith than my belief in Christianity and the Bible. I have also studied world religions and agree that there are numerous similarities in many cases but Christianity is the only belief in which we have a risen Saviour and a Loving God that is interested in our daily lives.

You always say that you would look at things logically and make the logical choice. You also admit that you do not deny the existence of God, it just has not been proven to you. We are then presented with 2 choices, what you believe and what I believe. If when I die, what you believe is true, then I have lost nothing. I have lived a fulfilling life and am simply dead. However if I am right, then there is an eternity as explained by the Bible and though your life was fulfilling to you, your eternity will be spent in a sinners Hell. It would seem that the logical choice would be to prepare for the eventuality of eternity.

As far as freedom and salvation in non-belief, I do not understand the concept. This world I live in where I see people slaves to drugs, alcohol, sexual perversion, money, anger, hate, bitterness and numerous other physical and mental masters, does not offer freedom in non-belief. I have true freedom because I have submitted to a higher authority, who I have come to know through His very word, the Bible, and He has delivered me from the bondage of sin and despair.

People may say they are in control, and have no authority in which they serve but I disagree with this on what I have observed and experienced. This is tangible proof that something is always in authority over a person. I have attempted to comfort the 5 yr old child who was raped because someone was controlled by their perversion. I have attempted to comfort the family who lost their child in a wreck caused by a drunk who is controlled by alcohol. Or the drug induced murder, the marriage ruined by sexual immorality, etc. These are things I see on a regular basis and am so glad I have freedom from that sort of life because I have submitted to God and the teachings of the Bible.

Reply