He does. To choose to believe in God or not but not when it came to writing His book. God let’s man screw up alot things ie the enviroment, cloning, our bodies, but I know He wouldn’t let us screw up the His instuction manual for life.
It’s very simple.
The Bible has errors because God uses flawed vessels.
The reason God “allowed” errors in the Very Important Book is the same reason He “allows” people to sin. If he forced an interpretation of His will on someone, it’s the same as forcing an action upon that person. And He doesn’t play that way, does He?
Two items on the current agenda here:
- Fenris, for once Bill is “preaching it straight” with absolutely no contradiction. St. Paul is quite explicit (he being, mostly, the source of faith-based salvation doctrines) that one may obtain “righteousness” by following the Law. The trouble is that nobody does, perfectly. (Many of my posts lately have not “loved my neighbor as myself,” for example.) And one item Jesus adds to the mix makes it impossible for one who listens to Him to perfectly follow the Law: “Be ye perfect, as the Father in Heaven is perfect.” Betcha nobody wants to lay claim to perfection on a par with God, supposing Him to exist, be omnipotent and omniscient. (Remember that incident in fourth grade?)
For this reason, the Incarnation, Passion, and Resurrection of Jesus are considered to have fulfilled the Law in full, and to be “transferrable” to all who commit themselves to Him. (Best analogy is to feudalism: The King doesn’t worry about what the peasants do; enough that they give their allegiance to the Duke, who gives his to the King.)
Therefore, if you trust in Jesus’s love for you, as exemplified in what He is known to have done on Earth (and never mind the historical-accuracy quibbles; we’re talking acceptance of the Gospel accounts), and follow His commandments, then God looks at you from the Throne of Judgment and sees, not your sins, but Jesus’s righteousness.
Okay, where does this leave the Jews? (Religious, not ethnic, in this context) Well, save for the “Messianic Jews” (who are Christians who hold to the traditions, more or less), they don’t have faith in Jesus in the sense spelled out above. (Regardless of what they may think about Him as a more-or-less heterodox prophet of sorts.) But God never takes away what He offers: Keep the Law. Perfectly. No sins, no mistakes. Be righteous as He is righteous.
Bill, have I covered what you intended to say?
- Galatians. What “false gospel” was Paul warning about? The remainder of the Epistle spells it out in detail: According to the false teachers, God demands that you keep the Law instead of putting your trust in Jesus. While Paul (in Romans) is more-or-less accepting that one might hypothetically choose the hard road of keeping the Law, he is dead set (in Galatians) that nobody require this of Christians.
The songs and dances about what Leviticus says about gays, the Ten Commandments, and all the other fun stuff Falwellianity preaches, strike me as a good 20th-21st Century parallel to that “false gospel.”
Anyone else get that impression? Bill, any comments?
Thank you poly for chirpin 
(sorry I couldn’t resist with your name and all)in.
I think what you posted is very true. But back to the false gods verses. Could any other religion that is not the Bible be considered the same. I wonder if it is best that we email each other on this, so I won’t get flamed and you won’t have to put yourself in controvercial(sp I am tired) tone with some people here that are not going to appreciate what is being discussed. Or maybe we should even discuss over at the Parlor so we can get some more view points on it. Let me know but I got to go now. See ya tomorrow. And once again thanks poly. I really am trying and it is not easy for me ya know.
Besides I think this thread has been hijacked(which a terrible word to use these days) enough.
Bill:
You’re missing one point here.
I don’t believe in the Bible.
The Bible never stepped down from being omnipotent and omniscient to become a fetus in the womb. The Bible never consented to die in agony on the Cross for our salvation. The Bible never rose from the dead. The Bible never spoke to me in the night, nor filled the needs I didn’t realize were there and lacking until God gave me what would fill them.
I believe in God.
I think the Bible is the fairly accurate record of His dealings with the Jewish people and of His sending His Son for our salvation. But I never mistake it for the God it bears witness to.
Lots of conservative evangelicals (often AKA fnd**s*) do seem to make that mistake.
I don’t believe you or I or anybody else has the right to limit what God can do. Ranging from past Catholic theologians who were convinced that God only worked through clergy in communion with the See of Rome, to Joseph Smith and his teaching that all existing churches were apostate (sorry, Monty and PLG), to the typical radio/TV evangelist who calls my church full of sinners and preaching Antichrist (the first is true, as it is of every church, or ought to be). And I think God tried to get his word out through a boy named Siddhartha of the Sakyamuni family in India – but it got all messed up with reincarnation and bodhisattvas and a multitude of other junk. And through Mohammed – who preached the one true God as opposed to the idols of Mecca at the time, and said that He had said things like “And if ye mingle your affairs with theirs, then truly they are your brothers” and some of the quotes above. And through Mohandas Gandhi, and Baha’ullah. And in each case the personality of the person serving as vehicle got in the way of the truth. As it did with Moses, Ezra, Paul, James, Matthew, and probably everybody else who had a hand in composing what we now call the Bible. (Ezra had a thing about gettin’ rid of them furriners who are leading our youth astray. Matthew had a hangup that every time Jesus took a deep breath he needed to find a prediction of it somewhere in the Law and Prophets. Paul had a severe case of scruples – a perennial guilt trip that being called by Jesus rescued him from, but which marked him for life. And so on.)
Poly, I truly appreciate the answer but I’m afraid I’m missing a step somewhere.
Here’s where I’m confused. No prob on understanding the idea that Christ’s perfection, if accepted and believed in substitutes for your sins and if you don’t, since God can’t abide sin, you go to Hell. That’s the basis of a large sector of Christian teaching in baby-talk.
But Bill, and now it seems you have said that I’m missing a part. As someone who doesn’t accept Christ as the Only Begotten Son…etc. and my saviour, I still have a way in: be perfect. Follow the Law perfectly. But in both your teaching and mine, no-one can!
There will always be mistakes, flaws, sins. Even if only sins of thought and not deed. What’s the point of offering a (excuse the word) loophole to allow Jews (let’s skip “Messianic Jews” for the moment) in, if no Jew ever (excluding Christ, depending on your beliefs) can pass muster?
It’s like saying (apologies for this analogy: it’s inflammatory and I admit it, but I can’t come up with a better one) that a country club isn’t bigoted because it allows any Black in, as long as the Black Person’s got green blood, two heads, and can fly via telekinesis.
Since no Jew (no person!) can meet the standards, why list them?
I’m not really happy (to whatever extent my happiness matters) with the “Don’t believe in Jesus, end up in Hell” school of thought, but it seems consistant and supportable by the text.
I’m much happier with the “Try your best, work real hard, follow The Law to the extent you can, and God in His mercy can and will overlook your sins and let you in”. Also consistant, though less supported by the text.
I’m very confused by this third version: “Believe in Jesus, go to Heaven, don’t believe in Jesus, end up in Hell. Unless you’re perfectly without sin. And no-one is.” What’s the point of that last caveat, since the total number of people in that group is either 0 or 1 depending on the teachings you believe?
Or are you saying that I’m under the same rules as the folks in the OT, since I don’t follow Jesus? Which means a (language butchery alert) lower standard of “perfection”?
Or am I completely misunderstanding you (which is entirely possible)? 
Fenris, befuddled.
Poly:
Look at WB’s spelling & grammar “style” if you will. What we have here is yet another example of someone who damn near can’t read worshipping a book.
Will it never end?
Polycarp,
Wow.
I am not a Christian. In fact, I am a confirmed atheist.
But I have to say, that was surely the most impressive, most downright sensible statement of faith I have ever heard.
I am very impressed.
I say again, Wow.
Well, Fenris, both religions teach that God forgives sins that are truly and earnestly repented of. There’s a big deal in some forms of Christianity about John’s metaphor of Jesus as the Lamb Without Blemish Who gave Himself as a sin offering – “the one perfect and sufficient sacrifice and oblation for the sins of the whole world,” to quote Abp. John Cranmer, who wrote the original Anglican liturgy.
Now a strong anti-survival-of-a-valid-Judaism preacher would suggest that, in the absence of the Temple, and with Jesus having done this, you have no chance of making a sin offering – unless you buy into the one Jesus made. But that ain’t my cup of tea – Yom Kippur obviously has an important point even today. And Jesus never abolished it; it just grew out of favor with the celebration of the Resurrection and all the stuff that grew up with it.
Finally, and I am admittedly at odds with the formal teaching of almost all Christian churches here (though I think not with a large number of believers), I don’t think God “sends anybody to Hell” unless they specifically “choose to go there.” Hey, if He’s willing to become human (quite a demotion from being God), die a torturous death – with, evidently, no certainty as He does that He’s coming back to life – and so forth and so on, is He really going to fly into a murderous rage at some petty offense one of us commits? He’s enthusiastic about us coming to freely love Him, and He keeps trying to get us to do so. I don’t think He ever stops. Not death nor denial nor sarcasm (nor czarcasm) nor anything else will stop Him from unconditional love and seeking us to love Him in return. Until and unless you finally trash the flame of your spirit into an ash that cannot love (pardon the metaphor, but there are no English words that convey the effect of “waste products of a burned-out soul” adequately) and ultimately reject Him completely and permanently in full knowledge of what you’re doing – in which case He will honor your decision sorrowfully.
CAll me crazy, but in a way, I think hell is reincarnation. I do believe in reincarnation-I think it’s a way for us to keep learning. Of course, I COULD be wrong, but this is just my belief.
Fenris, bubeleh[sup]*[/sup], I’m totally not interested in diving into this debate, based on my experience in the other WB thread - I simply don’t have the energy. However, you might find some interesting information/viewpoints with which to counter Polycarp and Wildest Bill’s claims, here. Good luck.
[sup]*[/sup]Ok, so I used a different phonetic spelling last time. I guess this would be the more “proper” way to spell the extended version of bubee. <pinches Fenris’ cheek again, and hopes he doesn’t smack me> 
I really appreciate your consideration in avoiding stepping on my penis - Spiny Norman
Jeg elsker dig, Thomas
Poly
Thanks. That makes sense and answers a lot of questions I’ve had.
One or two points/comments:
You can’t be too far out of the mainstream: C.S. Lewis agrees with you. There’s a scene in The Last Battle where Aslan begs a particularly nasty group of Dwarves to see him and they refuse. The metaphor is a bit heavy handed, but the prose is chillingly beautiful as Aslan keeps offering and the Dwarves keep refusing.
**
I’ve always wondered about this part: if he’s all God (and all Man), shouldn’t he be omniscient? I know that he’s not or else why would he ask to have the Cup taken from him in the garden, but how can he be fully God and not know everything.
Also, in all seriousness: have you ever thought of starting a “Ask the Apologist” or “Ask the Christian Guy” thread, dealing with this sort of question? I’d really be interested, and I’ll bet a bunch of other Dopers would, too.
**
I ain’t gonna pardon the metaphor, as I found it to be fantastic. I’m serious about an “Ask the Apologist/Christian Guy” thread.
Thanks again, Poly!
Fenris
Crazy? Naw. Samsara is what it is.
Here’s the verse in question:
“The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities–his eternal power and divine nature–have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.”
Here’s the following verses, which provide the context which WB left out:
“Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator–who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.”
Where to begin?
First off, I think that it’s reasonable to think that I, as a Christian, would have actually read the Bible, yes? For that matter, I would be willing to bet that I’ve studied the Bible more since I left Christianity than you have in all your years as a Christian.
Secondly, I said that if you want to have any chance of converting me, you’ll have to quit throwing arguments at me and actually listen to what I say. “You’re an atheist because you want to sin! That’s why you believe in evolution!” “No, I’m an atheist because when I prayed, God wasn’t there. And my belief in evolution had nothing to do with it.” “Like I said, you rejected God because you were blinded by evolution! That’s why you’re so sinful!” So much for the idea that you might be turning over a new leaf.
Third, who the hell are you to imply that I neither glorified God nor gave thanks to him? I was an extremely devout Christian. I loved your “god” with all my heart, and strove to serve him in every aspect of my life, even for a long time after I realized that my prayers were getting no more response than speaking to a stone. Perhaps if you actually listened to me, you’d realize that.
Fourth, like I said before, why should I betray my morality in order to bow to some false idol just because some illegal drug user on the Internet told me to? Quoting some verse about how people who don’t bow to your demon are just foolish perverts isn’t going to convert me. Maybe if you had actually listened to me, you’d realize that.
Fifth, since you like Scripture so much, try this on for size, Mr. Wildest Drug-using, Reckless-Driving, Hate-Mongering, Millionaire-Begging Bill:
Matt 7:3-5
“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?
How can you say to your brother, `Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”
-Ben