"God works in mysterious ways"
"You can't attribute human traits to God"
"You can't judge God"
"God is inscrutable"
"Maybe God has his reasons that we don't know"

My claim: If these statements are genuinely taken to heart, then the inevitable conclusion is that neither the Bible nor revealed religion in general should be taken seriously.

Discuss?

If you don't know, and cannot know, what God's plan is, what God's nature is, or anything about his being, then saying anything at all on the subject is pure jibberish. But those statements are not meant to be taken seriously. Those are just all lines theists use to escape real discussion. White flags.

You are right. Religious people are just plain crazy.

God has revealed enough of Himself to us to take revealed religion and the Bible seriously.

The Bible uses anthropomorphic expressions a lot. Ultimately these fail to perfectly describe God. However, as Jesus spoke in parables so we would understand, God has decided to use human characteristics to describe Himself so we may better understand.

Your fist mistake:
I don't know if God exists or not but if God should exist, you must first explain how could one be able to understand everything what happens (or how could one be able to understand everything is created the way, it has been created), before you claim that those sentences make no sense.
Your second mistake:
Holy books are a reminder and a pathfinder for believers, they are of no use or at least not much use for atheists.
Your third mistake:
In the case that God shouldn't exist the senteces that you did chose make still sense. But in which way? Isn't it enough for you to wonder, in which way the sentences might still make a sense? Wondering is sweet, ego is bitter.

Please stick to the topic. This is not a discussion on whether God exists.

In other words God can be judged freely for her actions? Or rather, God is scrutable?

It is very clear that I did correctly answer to your thread. I guess you recognized your basic mistake (especially regarding your first mistake).

You wrote this: I haven't claimed those sentences make no sense. My claim was "If these statements are genuinely taken to heart, then the inevitable conclusion is that neither the Bible nor revealed religion in general should be taken seriously."

Now, please stay on topic.

lol, this means the sentences make no sense

I really don't think he has. Where has he revealed himself? If you find out, please let me know.

The best part is after making one of those claims, in the very next breath the theist will tell you that god is great.

The Holy Bible. Have you read it? Says it right there.

I had to actually check if you were theist or atheist there, because ironically that's pretty much the argument they're going to use.

Why discuss something with someone who believes in something undefined? Religion lurks on the outer borders of science, capitalizing on the dark corners of knowledge. Nowadays, it's pretty much reduced to coffeeshop believers, ignorant hooligans and comformity leafpeople, blowing whereever the wind might take them. And let's not forget the few stubborn intelligent people that actually "believes". Atl, in the civ western world.

I know what those last two groups are ("conformity leafpeople" is an apt description for > 50% of the population imo). But what do you mean by "coffeeshop believers"?

God never says his mind is completely scrutable in the bible.

He says the bible (in one of the Psalms) is the "thoughts of his heart".

What you think the bible says about God revealing his mind and what God says he is revealing are most likely 2 different claims. You should try studying God's claim first before you adopt people's impressions.

KJV has "thoughts": http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...11&version=KJV

NIV has "purposes": http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...11&version=NIV

Before we can discuss it, I think you need to explain your claim and what exactly you think is is a paradox.

At work people some people whom I have a great influence over the quality of their lives question what I do and most of the time I respond that I do what I do to make most of their lives easier and they just have to trust me on it(cause I feel I don't need/shouldn't have to explain every decision i make to the grunts). Maybe thats why I have no expectation that God doesn't explain every decision and I am not surprised some people question every decision He makes(I learned long ago the world is full of whiners/complainers).

You have a list somewhere?

Having a thread stickied in which posters briefly summarize their religious views (emphasis on "briefly") might not be a bad idea, but afaik there isn't one, yet.

I think that's a bad idea because once you do that it sets people's thoughts in stone but people themselves are always either progressing or changing (though sometimes the change isn't progressive).

The only one's thoughts that could ever be set in stone were God's. He did it at Mount Sinai.

So you post an update every time your beliefs change, and the mod updates the master list at the top of the thread.

Actually no, it doesn't. It means that either the sentences make no sense or revealed religion makes no sense.

The bottom level of possible explanation is pretty much given in the initial claim. More words can only make the argument less precise.

We can see thru you obsfuscation.... please just explain the paradox you see.