The early founders of our Nation came to set up a government based on Christian principals. They yearned for a new world where they could establish a society based on biblical values and morals. Our founding Fathers recognized the fact that virtue is crucial to wise leadership. Character does matter. Voters often accept character flaws like marital infidelity and are told not to focus on a candidates "personal life" but to "concentrate on the man". Many Americans fail to realize that a man who will lie to his own wife and break his marriage vows will think nothing of lying to his constituents and breaking his campaign promises.

Whatever happened to America? How did we get from Godly leaders to greedy politicians? We've come from colonial christian education to pagan public schools. How did we get from the puritans' influence and the Great Awakening to secular humanism and a valuless society?

The Founding Fathers had ample evidence that unrestrained democracy led to anarchy. Having witnessed the chaos in France, "the religiously minded leaders and citizens" decided "to choose delegates who had a deep commitment to religious roots of the colonists who established this country". Those who attended the Constitutional convention in 1787 in Philadelphia were selected for their deep commitment to Puritan and Calvinistic doctrine as well as for other political considerations. Their goal was not to establish a democracy in which "Every man does that which is right in his own eyes". Instead, they formated a representative form of government based on divinely inspired law. The Constitution they wrote and the gov. they founded upon it verified that they never intended to establish a secular nation. Instead it was and still is "One Nation Under God." There is no doubt about it--America was established as a christian nation based on biblical principles. I have my opinions on what has happened to America. What are yours? If you want to discuss this with me, please post.

Lydia, why so angry?? Can you not disagree with religion without calling those who believe in God names or talking disparagingly about us? I really don't get that.

If, as you say, he controls everything, my not acknowledging him is his plan, something he knew I would do, and something I couldn't chose not to do owing to his controlling everything and planning it.

God is in control. He controls everything, EXCEPT your free will to choose.

He therefore first created me to be an atheist and then punishes me for it.

He did not create you to be an atheist. He created you in hopes that you would believe in Him and accept Him as your Father.

That's the very definition of "unfair".

God is not unfair. He TELLS you that he loves you. He promises you an inheritance greater than anything you can imagine and shows you how to obtain it. He is drawing you to him through others who infiltrate your life. He desires for you to want him in your life. Why, oh why, is this unfair of him?

So you don't feel he's omnipotent and omniscient then? Not much of a supreme diety, then.

He knows your every thought, he just doesn't control them. You do that.

Which he created, and then placed there all the people he created and created to reject him.

God originally made the place called Hell to hold Lucifer and the angels who rebelled against him in Heaven. It was not made to hold humans. But when the first Humans rebelled against Him also, through their sin and disbelief, God made a judgment that all who would desire to follow Satan and disbelieve that he is God would also go there. He did not create Humans with the intent for them to reject him. He gave them a free will to choose him or reject him.

You make your god out to be like a kid holding a magnifying glass burning insects.

Then hell is fine with me.

Yes, they were. I will continue to be convinced it’s a lie until I see proof otherwise.

Jesus said in Matthew 12:39 "A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was 3 days and 3 nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of man (Jesus) will be 3 days and 3 nights in the heart of the earth." In other words, God gave up his own Son (Jesus) to die on the cross for you, to save you from your sins. The 'proof' you look for is in his ressurection from the dead.

It's a self-serving lie as well. You've said, multiple times now, that being obedient to your imaginary master means YOU get rewarded for it. So, are you only doing it to be rewarded? How is that moral?

I believed in God because I felt there had to be something more to this life. After my admission of belief in His existance, he showed himself to me. I learned about his grace and love that he extended to all who come to believe in him after I read the bible. Then I realized the great rewards he has in stall for me and others who trust in him. It is even better for those who hear about God's love and rewards for them before they decide to believe in Him, because it can be a 'plus' in the decision making. lol.

Why does your god first create atheists (and Muslims, Buddhists, etc etc) and then punish them for it?

God didn't create anyone with an already predestined belief in something other than himself. Where do you get that? Can't you see that even though he knows the past, present, and future of every human being, that he doesn't make your choices for you?

What does it matter to such a powerful being that I (and billions upon billions of others) don't believe in him? If we're good people, why does it matter? Why is he so selfish and vain?

It matters because He's in love with you. He doesn't want to put people in Hell, out of his presence for all eternity, yet justice demands it.

The Judge (God) in the court room has to sentence the defendant (any human) for his crime. The lawyer (Jesus) asks if he could take the defendants punishment for him. To satisfy the law, which states that the punishment for sin is death, God allows the lawyer to die for his crime. The defendant goes free.

................................................................

In Exodus 31, the war that God instigated was for his vengeance against the Midianites for their part in seducing the Israelites to engage in sexual immorality and to worship Baal of Peor (A false God).The women were the ones who were guilty and did the seducing, therefore they were to be killed. The virgins were innocent of the indecencies at Peor, thus their lives were spared. And if the men didn't keep them for themselves as wives, who would care for them? Women depended on the men for their very survival back then. They didn't hold jobs. It was an act of mercy for the men to keep them for themselves. (they didn't rape them) Many countries have gone to war over vengence. When Pearl Harbor was hit, we didn't tolerate it. Even so, God is allowed to send his people into a Holy war against others if he so chooses.

In Deut. 21, the Lord allowed the men who went to war to take a wife from the remains of the war back with them if they so chose to. This was because the after affects of war were hard on the women. Like I said, women whose husbands were killed in a war, needed to be cared for. It's not like today. Women didn't have jobs or any means except prostitution to make a living and get food. Believe me, even though they were very upset about the war and their men being killed, they were even more grateful if someone took them home with them to be their husband. This was what was needed to be done. It's like a soldier seeing a baby or child left behind form the destruction of the war they just fought and taking the child back with them to care for them instead of leaving them there to die from lack of food or care. The Lord tells the man to give the women time to mourn before they can become husband and wife in verse 13. He is being considerate of their loss, yet gacious to still provide for them.

Isaiah 13 is a prophecy against Babylon.(present day Iran) God's judgements on the Nations are often a part of his salvation of his people. This prophecy foretells what will happen in the future. It is a warning to mankind of his fierce anger and wrath that he will pour out on "the day of the Lord" (which speaks of his return) It is those who are at war at that time who do these horrible killings, not God. The fact is that all people are affected by war.

Isaiah 3:17 There are always cosequences for our wrong doings.

I’m not a woman so I realize I’m on shaky ground here but I think I would rather be allowed to choose prostitution than to be forced into rape and marriage form the man that just killed my husband/father/brother. To me, it sounds as if you are justifying rape in each one of your answers. Frankly, I don’t see how any woman could do that no matter what the circumstances, but that’s just me.

You don't live in that era of time. That is why you don't understand. Women were not equal to men, they didn't choose their husbands, they couldn't support themselves.

All I'm saying is you don't see the full picture. You read the story, you will do backflips to manufacture excuses for calling rape something else so you can continue to lie to yourself about how wonderful your imaginary master is. Also, the bible needs to be read in its full context - which includes the perspectives of OTHER people aside from the victors and rapists. History recorded by the winners is never an honest, accurate portrait of events.

Lydia,

I need to take a moment to commend you on your thoughts on where this topic is heading. There is absolutely no way a sane or caring person can condone rape. No matter what the context was at the time or even if you were to believe that somehow it was for the greater good. If those women were taken from their lands and forced to marry the conquers (which mean they would have had sexual relations with them) and they did not want it, they were raped – there is no other way to look at it. Rape is rape, and it is nothing short of horrific.

Lydia,

I need to take a moment to commend you on your thoughts on where this topic is heading. There is absolutely no way a sane or caring person can condone rape. No matter what the context was at the time or even if you were to believe that somehow it was for the greater good. If those women were taken from their lands and forced to marry the conquers (which mean they would have had sexual relations with them) and they did not want it, they were raped – there is no other way to look at it. Rape is rape, and it is nothing short of horrific.

I believe that you are looking for any reason to keep from believing in God.

It doesn't even say in any of those references that God told them to 'rape' the women. This is your own assumption.

If you were at war, and killed the men in that city and then left the women there to die, (because that is what happened to women in biblical times that had no husband),or have them turn to prostitution, (which is another form of rape), that would be better in your eyes than taking them into your home and making them your wife? Where you would care for them and support them? Don't you understand that the men they were married to before the war weren't even the men they chose to marry either? Women didn't choose their husbands. So in a sense, their first husbands were 'raping' them too.

In other countries today, women are considered no more than a dog is. It's just the way it is. It's not right, but it's how men have viewed women for centuries.

Now... God does not condone it, but he did allow it, and just because men do wrong, doesn't make God any less real. And it doesn't make the stories of the bible any less true. That's what happened, and that's what was written down to be told throughout the generations.

Whenever we read in history all of the deeds that sinful mankind has done, we can understand our need for a Savior better.

I am not “trying” to find a reason NOT to believe in God, but I have not found a reason TO believe in God. To me it sounds like a bunch of rewritten myths, hocus pocus, fairy tales, etc.. I have many friends and family that are religious and many of them find great peace in it. I do appreciate religion for that. I do however take exception to anyone that tries to push their religion on others or make society bend to the rules of their particular religion.

I am not “trying” to find a reason NOT to believe in God, but I have not found a reason TO believe in God. To me it sounds like a bunch of rewritten myths, hocus pocus, fairy tales, etc.. I have many friends and family that are religious and many of them find great peace in it. I do appreciate religion for that. I do however take exception to anyone that tries to push their religion on others or make society bend to the rules of their particular religion.

I hope you don't feel that I am one of those people. I mean, trying to 'push' my faith on you. I believe what I believe and I don't have any shame or problem with telling others about what I believe or why I believe that way. I understand that everyone has a right to believe any way they choose to. And of course, I am fine with that. I would love for all of mankind to believe in Jesus, because I am certain that his way is thee way, but I also know that others don't agree. I share what I believe is truth and others are free to accept it as such or reject it.

Well, yeah I kinda think you are. Because you would like the tenants of your religion to be taught in public schools and you would like the government to pass laws that are based on your religious principals. I don’t know if you are one of the people that wake me up on Saturday morning so that I may hear the word of God. I hope not, because those folks really irritate me.

Well, yeah I kinda think you are. Because you would like the tenants of your religion to be taught in public schools and you would like the government to pass laws that are based on your religious principals. I don’t know if you are one of the people that wake me up on Saturday morning so that I may hear the word of God. I hope not, because those folks really irritate me.

I meant pushing it on you, specifically.

No, I'm not the type to go door to door and peddle christianity.

I would like to have kept things the way they were. Yes. Up until the 1960's or so, christianity was pretty much the way it was here. Our founding Fathers were Christians. Christians set up the public schools in America and instituted prayer and moral teachings from the bible. No one was ashamed of the gospel like they seem to be today. God was not pushed out of the public realm.

I believe that when the minority of unbelievers stuck their noses into a good thing, the christians kept silent and allowed the minority to overtake the majority. They said nothing and did nothing. Little by little the atheists took God out of it all. (they are still working at it) We are largely at fault for that. When those that objected to prayer in school, for example, expressed their disgrace about it, they should have been directed to start their own private schools where God is not considered or prayed to. Instead, the majority was forced to go to private schools or to either accept that God would not be allowed in schools. This is where I have the problem.

I meant pushing it on you, specifically.

No, I'm not the type to go door to door and peddle christianity.

I would like to have kept things the way they were. Yes. Up until the 1960's or so, christianity was pretty much the way it was here. Our founding Fathers were Christians. Christians set up the public schools in America and instituted prayer and moral teachings from the bible. No one was ashamed of the gospel like they seem to be today. God was not pushed out of the public realm.

I believe that when the minority of unbelievers stuck their noses into a good thing, the christians kept silent and allowed the minority to overtake the majority. They said nothing and did nothing. Little by little the atheists took God out of it all. (they are still working at it) We are largely at fault for that. When those that objected to prayer in school, for example, expressed their disgrace about it, they should have been directed to start their own private schools where God is not considered or prayed to. Instead, the majority was forced to go to private schools or to either accept that God would not be allowed in schools. This is where I have the problem.

To be perfectly honest, I am glad athiests like myself have done this, listening (or reading) the things you have to say (write) make me very grateful that children wont be exposed to that in public schools. Your truth is not absolute truth. The bible may be the end all be all for you but it is not for everyone and you have no business declaring that it is. Religion should take place in private, not in public. Parents should teach their children at home, not in public. It is not up to teachers to teach the bible or any other form of religious propaganda, it is the parents responsibility. So, if by taking prayer out of the schools means that morality in America is declining, then christian parents are slacking on the job. Furthermore, there is a lot of significant debate on wether our founding fathers were christians or not.

Parents should teach their children at home, not in public. It is not up to teachers to teach the bible or any other form of religious propaganda, it is the parents responsibility.

I absolutely agree. And I have to say I feel the same way about how our teachers/schools are trying to force our kids to learn about sexual perversions and homosexuality in school. Those are things for private teachings at home.

Well that’s not fair. You said that type of language wasn’t there to your recollection, I just refreshed your memory that not only is it there, it is in numerous passages. In fact, what I posted was only a fraction of what I found in about 5 minutes. Now don’t get me wrong, I certainly don’t think you or most other Christians today believe that that language is acceptable. I do though take issue with people like Patty saying that “everything” in the Bible is good and wonderful or folks like you that choose to pretend the bad things aren't there, neither of those seem very right or ok to me.

I will cede you that, KartMan, because you make your points logically and validly. However, let me say this about my response (or more specifically, what I meant to say, versus how it came out): I didn't dare anybody to prove that rape was in the Bible, just that it was "pleasing to God" (or however Lydia phrased it). The Bible has some horrible events recorded in it, no doubt. But to equate a bad event with the author who wanted it recorded is a little fallacious.

Then you're either reading the Children's Bible or you're feigning confusing. Either way, one who's actually read it and not trying to pretend it's a pretty, flowerly moral story would easily recognize:

Judges 21:10-24

Numbers 31:7-18

Zechariah 14:1-2

Deuteronomy 20:10-14

Deuteronomy 21:10-14

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (my personal "favorite" - force a rape victim to marry the pig that attacked her)

Deuteronomy 22:23-24 (or your stone HER to death)

Lydia, I had to google these verses to refresh my memory. What I found surprised me a little. These verses don't support your claim one bit. The Judges verse is pretty clear in saying that God didn't come up with that plan....the men did. In fact, it goes out of the way to mention that Israel didn't have a unified leadership (implying that there was nobody to lead them morally.....this further implies that what was previously described was immoral and against the will of God)

The Deuteronomy stuff was the book of OT laws. Your "favorite" verse is clearly meant as a protection of women (now, we both know that women had almost no value to society back then. Things are different now, but back then women were pretty much possessions. Women really only had one asset back then....the ability to bear children. They only way a woman could really survive was to be married, and a man wouldn't marry a non-virgin, even if she was not a virgin because of a rape). It still doesn't show that God applaunds the act of rape, which is what you are determined to prove.

My goodness this is chilling misogyny. USED as brides - with not even a moment's thought to what the "bride" wanted. That's rape.

Heavy sigh....this is disingenuous, at best. You have to look at how the culture was back then, not compare it to today. Do you for one minute think that, say, the ancient Nords treated their women any better? back then, villiages and tribes were linked by bloodline. If you didn't want to marry your cousin, a marriage had to be bartered (often without the consent of the bride....which I suspect you know full well) or young men had to raid other villiages to get a bride.

Don't get off track with how atrocious rape is. Nobody here disputes that. Your original arguement was that God condones the act. He does not.

Lydia, why so angry?? Can you not disagree with religion without calling those who believe in God names or talking disparagingly about us? I really don't get that.

It has been a rather spirited debate, hasn't it? lol

Edited June 12, 200917 yr by plain

It has been a rather spirited debate, hasn't it? lol

Spirited debates are all well and good. Lord knows I've been known to shut down a board or two in my time in the name of "debate."

However, I guess I don't understand her vitriol against people she doesn't know and who I'm certain have done nothing to her. If she wants to disbelieve in God, that's fine. She's entitled to that, as I am to believe. But I don't see anybody daring to call non-believers names and show such hostility towards people simply for believing in a "fairy tale."

If her non-belief is so grounded and strong, then it should stand on its own "facts." However, it's beginning to look more like the only way to make her stance seem above the rest of ours is to bring down the opposition by bashing people who only have opposing views.

It doesn't exactly make her stance seem more legit. And I don't understand all the anger and hatred, honestly. Can't one disagree with the belief without turning to personal digs against people who simply believe in God?

I don't read Patty so I don't know what SHE'S saying, but the few others of us here who believe haven't made disparaging remarks against those here who do not believe. I don't think it's too much to ask the same respect for the people. Bash the theology all you wish, if that's your thing.

Plain,

"The Bible has some horrible events recorded in it, no doubt. But to equate a bad event with the author who wanted it recorded is a little fallacious"

This is exactly what I was trying to get across, but you said it how I wished I could have. Thanks.