Okay, but I was not asking you what is your personal views on God... I was asking if you agree on the christian God along with his attributes as decribed in christian theology? Because all your questions are kind of based on these attributes... I mean, if your questioning were against your own God, then ....that would be absurd, and I don't need to answer them...
Speaking of your answer and your view of God, it sounds to me that this are christian teachings which can be found in Judaism too, so from where do you believe that God would "care only for what is in your heart"? Or that God is "all loving"?
Those teachings, that God is "all loving" and "care only for what is in your heart", are only found in the Bible if I'm not wrong. So, based on Bible are your beliefs or not? And if are based on Bible, how could you disprove the Bible? Or you disprove only some parts, which you think are added or something like that by religious zelots ?
He failed? How is tha?, I don't understand! Can you explain?
God is by definition a perfect being...and I mean classical theism here...if we talk about Christianity, God is not only perfection, is "The necessity" of perfection.
I'll answer this for later...
Firstly, no, I do not agree with how the Christian church has described God...an I do not agree with how they “follow” Jesus.
The Bible is NOT free of mistakes and contradictions...this is easily provable...For instance, Mark writes that Jesus was crucified the day after the Passover meal (Mark 14:12; 15:25) while John says Jesus died the day before the Passover meal (John 19:14).Who is right?
In Mark 4, for example, Jesus allegedly stated that the mustard seed is “the smallest of all seeds on the earth.”
We know this is simply not true....so is Jesus wrong?
Occasionally I see a bumper sticker that reads: “God said it, I believe it, and that settles it.” My response is always, what if God didn’t say it? What if the book you take as giving you God’s words instead contains human words. What if the Bible doesn’t give a foolproof answer to the questions of the modern age-abortion, women’s rights, gay rights, religious and supremacy, western style democracy and the like? What if we have to figure out how to live and what to believe on our own, without setting up the Bible as a false idol–or an oracle that gives us a direct line of communication with the Almighty?
Not only do we not have the originals, we don’t have the first copies of the originals. We don’t even have copies of the copies of the originals, or copies of the copies of the copies of the originals. What we have are copies made later...much later. In most instances, they are copies made many centuries later. And these copies all differ from one another, and many thousands of places. Possibly it is easiest to put it in comparative terms: there are more differences among our manuscripts and there are words in the New Testament.
A.) Everyone knows the story about Jesus and the woman about to be stoned by the mob. This account is only found in John 7:53-8:12. The mob asked Jesus whether they should stone the woman (the punishment required by the Old Testament) or show her mercy. Jesus doesn’t fall for this trap. Jesus allegedly states “Let the one who is without sin among you be the first to cast a stone at her.” The crowd dissipates out of shame. This brilliant story was not originally in the Gospel of John or in any of the Gospels. “It was added by later scribes.” The story is not found in “our oldest and best manuscripts of the Gospel of John. Nor does its writing style comport with the rest of John. Most serious textual critics state that this story should not be considered part of the Bible.
B) After Jesus died, Mary Magdalene and two other women came back to the tomb to anoint the body of Jesus, according to Mark 16:1-2). They were met by a man in a white robe who told them that Jesus had been raised and was no longer there. The women fled and said nothing more to anyone out of fear (16:4-8). Everyone knows the rest of Mark’s Gospel, of course. The problem with the remainder of the story is that none of it was originally in the Gospel of Mark. It was added by a later scribe. Those additions include all of the following:
Jesus himself appeared to Mary Magdalene. She told the eleven apostles (minus Judas) about this vision, but they did not believe her. Jesus then appeared to the apostles, chastising them for failing to believe. He tells them that those who believe will be saved and those who don’t will be condemned. Then follows a critically important passage of the Bible.
"And these are the signs that will accompany those who believe: they will cast out demons in my name; they will speak in new tongues; and they will take up snakes in their hands; and if they drink any poison, it will not harm them; they will place their hands upon the sick and heal them."
Jesus is then allegedly taken up into heaven and sits at the right hand of God, while the disciples go forth into the world to proclaim the Gospel in miraculous fashion.
Without the above passages (which, again, were
not written by Mark) the Pentecostals lose their justification for speaking in “tongues.” And the Appalachian snake handlers have no basis for their dangerous practices.
C) John 5:7-8 is the only passage in the entire Bible that explicitly delineates the doctrine of the Trinity (that there are three persons and God but that all three constitute a single God):
"There are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Spirit and these three are one; and there are three that bear witness on earth, the spirit, the water, and the blood, and these three are one.”
There is strong evidence that this Trinity passage was entirely concocted and foisted upon Erasmus by outraged theologians who needed support for their prized theological doctrine.
Many believers rely fervently on the King James version of the Bible, for instance. They sometimes even say “If the King James was good enough for St. Paul, it’s good enough for me.”
The King James was not given by God but was a translation by a group of scholars in the early 17th century who based their rendition on a faulty Greek text.
In my experience, many people who cherry pick excerpts from the Bible as the proper way to determine what is moral are in utter denial that we don’t have accurate copies of the original writings. Most of them refuse to acknowledge that current popular versions of the Bible contain numerous discrepancies, even compared to the earliest manuscripts we
do have. This is on top of the fact that their are
hundreds of patent contradictions in the English version of the Bible. To most believers, none of this matters. Stay the course! In fact, in my experience most believers
rarely read what the consider to be God’s own inspired word.
Then you have your literalists....those that believe everything at face value even though Jesus spoke in parables....in PARABLES! That means they were made up stories to share a moral or idea...and yet, people believe them at face value...why? That is utter ridiculousness.
The story of creation itself is a parable...if you take it as a literal translation then you are trying to read in the dark.
A far as evolution...why can’t the idea of God creating mankind and evolution go hand in hand?
He made made out of the clays of the earth right? Why can’t that mean that we once came from the primordial ooze until God evolved us?
Because it wasn’t written as such? God gave us wonderful, questioning minds for a reason....use your reason, question.
Yes, God and Jesus failed if you believe that - God being perfect sent his perfect son to save the “whole world” and he only managed to save a small percentage (what most churches now profess to be the number). If God wishes it so that the whole world be saved then it is.
