Why doesn't god just destroy the devil? He created him afterall. Thou shalt giveth and thou shalt taketh away? God creating the world just seems nonsensical. God has existed forever and one day he decided to create the world. What was he doing before that? Just chilling by himself for eternity? And forget the world, what about the rest of the universe? Did god create that or did that exist before god created the world? And if he did create it, why isn't that written about on the bible? If god knows all, sees all, hears all, knows our past, our present and our future, what is the purpose of worshipping him? if he knows everything we do all the time why does he put us on earth to see if we're worthy of heaven when he already knows whether we are or not? secondly, why does god have so many plans? he has a special plan for this and for that, and it's all just life's great mystery. is he seriously bored out of his mind and needs to come up with weird ways in which faith works in order to amuse himself? why do we waste time going to church and being holy when we can just confess our sins on our deathbed and have a clean slate to go to heaven? if life is so complex that it has to have a creator, doesn't that mean the creator must be even more complex? Is it even possible to be as complex as every bit of matter existing within the universe? if god creates people in his image, and there are gay people that exist, is god gay? secondly why would he hate them? on a further note, if god creates everyone in his image, can he really be mad at anyone if they are in his image? Atheists? Murderers? Terrorists? George Bush? Is michael jackson really the image of god according to this? Can god create a rock so heavy that he can't lift it? Can god tie a knot that not even he can untangle? These questions, while cynical, do raise some eyebrows about god in my opinion.
............................................ Right...the good NOT done is what I was getting at. Answer that in the original context I used it in. Hypothetically if I were destined to go to hell. Roll with that. God has already decided hell for me. Not too big on reading the bible. You may want to paraphrase for me. I don't think Leviticus and Exodus are love stories . Or the countless jews being killed and tortured for their beliefs in the bible. Still though, if you're going to argue my 'love arguement' tell me why god can be love and be a jealous god. I wasn't asking the difference between the two. I was asking if good Christians looked at both sides of the coin.
Yes, it was. And any good point you may have made was lost by the idiotic way you chose to present it; by making ignorant assumptions and insinuating the topic creator was a satan worshipper. I mean, seriously... I'm not trying to piss you off, or create an enemy, but really try to think about how you present your arguments next time. BTW, Dented, you working on that post of mine yet? Good luck to ya man, I imagine that's probably a really tough one.
Ezekiel 3 (New King James Version) Ezekiel Is a Watchman 16 Now it came to pass at the end of seven days that the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 17 “Son of man, I have made you a watchman for the house of Israel; therefore hear a word from My mouth, and give them warning from Me: 18 When I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life, that same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood I will require at your hand. 19 Yet, if you warn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but you have delivered your soul. 20 “Again, when a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits iniquity, and I lay a stumbling block before him, he shall die; because you did not give him warning, he shall die in his sin, and his righteousness which he has done shall not be remembered; but his blood I will require at your hand. 21 Nevertheless if you warn the righteous man that the righteous should not sin, and he does not sin, he shall surely live because he took warning; also you will have delivered your soul.” 22 Then the hand of the LORD was upon me there, and He said to me, “Arise, go out into the plain, and there I shall talk with you.” 23 So I arose and went out into the plain, and behold, the glory of the LORD stood there, like the glory which I saw by the River Chebar; and I fell on my face. 24 Then the Spirit entered me and set me on my feet, and spoke with me and said to me: “Go, shut yourself inside your house. 25 And you, O son of man, surely they will put ropes on you and bind you with them, so that you cannot go out among them. 26 I will make your tongue cling to the roof of your mouth, so that you shall be mute and not be one to rebuke them, for they are a rebellious house. 27 But when I speak with you, I will open your mouth, and you shall say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD.’ He who hears, let him hear; and he who refuses, let him refuse; for they are a rebellious house. IF you decide to read you can understand my argument. Because like the man with Suicide tendency, or with a man that you warn of death. If you know he is in danger, and DO NOT take the time to help them then you betrayed them. Look at it as this your suggesting a case of a man with a gun why are you giving the man the gun? I can suggest many good reasons why to give a man a gun. Is there not a saying that buy a man a meal once he will eventually will be hungry again, but give the man a gun and he can always have his fill. If you really argue a what if cause give me the total what if. Because the reason you gave the man the gun matter tons. If you gave the man the gun and said don't kill yourself with it are you really telling him you don't care, or that your just taking the time to give him just one meal and not really helping him out very much. And that is the blood on your hands at least to the point of your not caring for another human being even though you know he needs it. Now I ask you what is the difference from helping a man suicidal and a man needing shelter? Both of which needs help why can't you help and serve them? Again I Say the Good UNDONE. So your saying Hypothetically your destined to Choice on your own will to reject good as well? Because IN this predestined Choice, you still have the over all choice of denying Christ. How can you say you did not have the choice? Because you said No...does it matter if God Knows you said no. I mean get past your mind set your bound to hell and see that your choice is your choice even if I know your going to say it. Its very similar to a child that Loves candy. This child is asked does He (gender doesn't matter) want some candy Even though you know he is going to say yes does it make it destined which out his choice of saying YES? I try not to paraphrase You should just read the bold face text. Luke 16:19-31 The Rich Man and Lazarus 19 “There was a certain rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and fared sumptuously every day. 20 But there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, full of sores, who was laid at his gate, 21 desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell[d] from the rich man’s table. Moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. 22 So it was that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. 24 “Then he cried and said, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.’ 25 But Abraham said, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things; but now he is comforted and you are tormented. 26 And besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, so that those who want to pass from here to you cannot, nor can those from there pass to us.’ 27 “Then he said, ‘I beg you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father’s house, 28 for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment.’ 29 Abraham said to him, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.’ 30 And he said, ‘No, father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ 31 But he said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.’” Now Where does this man have the foresight to also warn his bothers? How does he know where they are bound? Each person receives the same message its how we take in the message. O so you mean the sights and wonders of Miracles are required of God have to do for the people he created? Much of Exodus is preparing the people of God for a new nation.Giving of a Law, Taking of Sacrifice, and the atonement of sins: are all methods of God talking to people HOW They can have a relationship with Him(Gender is just how it is said don't bring it up) All of which are explained IN Leviticus Sent to the Levites so there was Union with God. Very VERY similar to a Wedding with God. Very Ironic but take it as how its explained IN Revelation if you want too. I thought Dented Finished off that debate... I looked threw the debate and can't find the exact verses you used can you repost the arguement in short verse or how ever you feel doing so... I Say to you A Christian on any Level has been on both sides of the coin You can't be saved untill you are in need of help. SO either The person commited the sin OR was at least knowing of the sin. Take it as there isn't good and bad Christians..there is just Saved Sinners? LIke it that way?
Are you trying to strengthen my arguement or do you just not understand what I'm getting at? "Because like the man with Suicide tendency, or with a man that you warn of death. If you know he is in danger, and DO NOT take the time to help them then you betrayed them." "Look at it as this your suggesting a case of a man with a gun why are you giving the man the gun?" Now equate what you just said to Adam and Eve. Why would god give a 'gun' to Adam and Eve by making a tree of the knowledge of GOOD AND EVIL aka right and wrong, a talking snake, and by not stopping the talking snake from deceiving their naive minds? My question, put in simpler terms, is how could god punish Adam and Eve for the wrong they committed without the knowledge of good and evil? Surely they were punished only for their naivety. Or if you have a mother who says, "would you like this child molester to baby sit you?" The child says no but the mother leaves him anyway because she doesn't have to take any back sass from this kid. The molester does his horrible act and when the mother comes home the child reveals what has happened to him. To his astonishment, the mother is mad at the child for not resisting the child molester. That can be considered an analogy to the creation myth. What I got from this was that being poor and rich were blessings and sins respectively in tune with the afterlife. My personal opinion on theology is that god made the heavens and the earth, not modern money mechanics. Another message I got was that this man would be tortured for eternity for not helping the poor. Now this certainly seems fair, if your stingy, cold, and mean during your life time why would you deserve to be rewarded in death? However, upon questioning the thinking of two wrongs making a right, I came to the conclusion that even if two wrongs do make a right it is still eternal and therefore unfair. What are 50 years of torture and blessings compared to an eternity of blessings and torture and I mean that poor to rich, respectively. I also found an interesting quirk in those verses, it states: "If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead." Why did god send Jesus if this is so? I mean sure you could send him to die for our sins but why did he make him rise from the dead? Surely, the bible wouldn't contradict god's will in this manner. Besides, Moses only wrote the first five books, making them holy. This passage of Luke should be it's own separate book, not within the bible. It sounds like commentary, a DVD bonus feature. To answer your main question or rather what I think your main question is. God doesn't give us foresight because we should just blindly accept what was written thousands of years ago. That seems to be the whole message. I mean if my great grandma rose from the dead and came to talk to me about Jesus, I would be a devout believer. However, Abraham seems to have different ideas on how people should go about acquiring faith. Who am I to question authority, right? I mean he's obviously in heaven so he did something right...or is he? It's blatantly obvious looking back at history that a personal relationship with god was not even on the list until the protestant reformation (the list being what Christians should and should not do). Back then blood sacrifice and the psychological and physical torture of one's self would be the only way to be with god. Sounds sadistic from my point of view but I'm sure it's not as bad as the bible makes it sound. No, you came in late, you do your homework. I'm not going to softly introduce you into this debate holding your hand. It is in a spoiler tag somewhere in pages 3-6. Eh. My experience, when I was saved, would be that I wasn't in need of help. I went to Church every Sunday until I was 14. I then got saved. What led me to get saved was a church camp, where flashing lights, Christian music, and powerfully influential speakers set out to mold my mind into their idea of Christianity. The act of being saved, however, didn't mean anything for me. After the camp was over, the lights were out, and the musicians were gone, I went back to being a normal 14 year old. This change from extreme passion, to normalcy, made me feel as though nothing preserved my "holy spirit" other than other people sustaining it for me. What I now realize in later life was that mob mentality energized me into a cult. Nothing was wrong with me before I went, and everything appeared to be wrong with me when I left (spiritually of course, no physical harm other than scrapes and bruises from accidents while playing), and I was expected to fix it by coming back for more spiritual abuse accompanied by donating a few bucks here and there. It just struck me as odd, that something as powerful as god was so fickle. Anywho...
Certainly, there are other reasons. I used that as one example. No one would logically contest that a majority of the food we eat is unhealthy. *looks up deification* So, I'm not sure what I'm debating here. I think you're trying to say that the god-like nature of some of our ancestors made their life longer. It's definitely a theory, but not one I could debate over, given my current knowledge. ownd. WELL THEN, *is offended and feels stupid* I'm not sure what effect the whole "water shield in the sky" thing would have. I know that, according to the Bible, it had not yet rained before The Flood. Thus, we see an explanation as to why no one believes Noah when he said something to the tune of, "Hey, guys! Water is gonna fall from the sky and kill everyone, but it's k. I'm making this huge boat. Wanna come???" No one had heard of or seen water falling from the sky. My guess is that the water didn't just appear. I would say that it was probably in a static state in our atmosphere similar to what we call the Ozone Layer. Now, I could not scientifically explain why it would lengthen the lives of our inhabitants, but I can Biblically examine (as this is a Biblical debate) the issue and derive, from there, a verdict. Reasoning for The Flood: God saw nothing but perversion of the world He'd created; so, he drowns the place. (Please, no one turn this into another 'God is love' debate.) Think of the Garden of Eden. Would you not agree that God would notice our inability to maintain such a long life without screwing something up? I believe it was when our ancestors began living unrighteously that God took away from of the earth's present life-extending qualities. If one lived to be 800 years old. That's over 8 times the amount of time to have children. If this person is living irresponsibly, that's a whole lot more children. Imagine a world that over-populated. I think God was preventing this. I don't believe Christianity's ultimate goal is to save all people. As I've previously stated, I can't stand Christians who preach "love for everyone" and "everything's going to be ok." That's only saying what people want to hear. The blunt truth is that one will not enter heaven, if he is not saved (or, at least, that's the truth I follow). I think where we'll mainly differ in your second argument is our definition of, "proof of love." Where I see His proof of love is the change in my life. Alrighty. So, according to this verse, if I sow "good," I will reap "good." If I enact godliness in my life, I will see a counteraction (love). This isn't to say that God doesn't love those who don't do good, but that His love is different from our own. We our guilty of misinterpreting His love for hate or something of the sort. By this, you mean I win, right? ....RIGHT??? Lulz, I agree. No benefit+no common purpose in arguing=No argument. I feel it to be pure evil when a person is strewn away from Christianity becaues of its "followers." I'm guilty of wrong. In fact, I'm the most guilty of wrong. I've sinned up a storm and half, to say the least. However, I will never deny it. I will never hold myself above you or anyone. I think Christians should have just as much a focus on outward appearance as inward belief. Instead, one should not follow Christianity so that he may reach heaven (referring to the text I bolded in your quote). If one truly follows God, he should act accordingly. This, I believe, would offer up a different definition for Christianity than "torture." My question to you would be, if you allowed yourself to be exposed to all things scientific and watched atheistic videos on youtube 'debunking' the judeo-christian god would you be a good Christian for it? Is it blasphemy to question an idea without proof and whose only result was the damnation of man's critical thinking, morality, and soul?[/quote] ABSOLUTELY NOT. I'm partaking in this debate as a test of my faith. Upon being saved, I decided that this was the path I wanted to take with my entire life. The initial lacking was my knowledge of the religion itself. Once I'd decided that this was my path, I wanted to stretch my knowledge to a greater state. For one, you see it as an idea without proof, and I do not. This is opinion, and I cannot promise that God will send a physical representation (proof) to you tonight. So, that's out. However, the "idea" of Christianity does not condemn critical thinking. Actually, the "living in the act of" statement refers only to blasphemy, as it is the unforgiveable sin of which you spoke. If one is currently practicing homosexuality. I do not believe he will enter heaven. However, if he has turned away from that sin, I believe he has as fair a chance as any. Hmm, last part was a bit unnecessary, but that's beside the point. My answer was similar to your prediction because homosexuality is a sin. Again, it is not hate for God to send those practicing things he has labeled as sin to hell. It is not up to you and me to tell God which things are sin and which things aren't. He's told us, and if you see flaw in Him exacting the damnation that he's already promised, then I can't help you. I refer to the King James Version. I take what the Bible says at face value. I don't read deeply into what's being said or try to pertain it to my own life. I read, understand, then apply. It is misinterpreted because of a person's desire to plan the Bible around their life, rather than the opposite. As per the prejudice against homosexuals, I cannot explain. It is sin, but never should a Christian approach them differently than a heterosexual person. If.... Bob (a heterosexual) has a problem with jealousy. A Christian should acknowledge this as sin, but not hate the person. Joe (a homosexual) is in the sin of...well...homosexuality. A Christian should acknowledge this as sin, but not hate the person. Make sense? I think that Christians sometimes misinterpret our responsibility to call sin a sin as a right to discriminate. Just the same, I think that non-Christians mistake our proclamation as hate. It works both ways. WHAT?! HOW DARE YOU?!
Completely and totally untrue. Cooking, pasteurization, sanitation of preparation environment, immunizations in cattle to prevent disease in the beef, and purified water. If you think these things are worthless, then you need to get out of your faith immediately and realize that science gives you your comfortable life and gives you a longer one. The people of the time that wrote these books had very poor sanitation. In fact, in the bible for the Jews to remain clean they are told to go outside, **** in a hole, and bury it. 1). No wiping occurring...gross. 2). Insects and disease will be attracted to the excrement's shallow grave. 3). What kind of god tells you to **** in a hole to be clean. Seriously! If it hadn't rained, how would there be plants? If there were no plants, how could their be animals? With your second point you undermine the water cycle. The earth, to hold 2000 years worth of evaporated water would require enormous temperatures. If the temperature was too hot the oceans would boil away and humans too. So we see that water vapor, once enough gathers it falls from the sky. I don't know how I could put that simpler but what you just said makes no logical sense. It's like saying, "guys I'm building a global warming machine, with it we will fly around the galaxy while ordering pizza!" It just makes absolutely no sense. Thirdly, the ozone layer is not water vapor. It is O3. If 2000 years of water vapor somehow accumulated in a layer above the earth, the clouds would have been miles high, blocking out visible light and reflecting most heat radiation. Lastly, even if all this were so barometric pressures, water vapor, and non-rainy days do not increase our life expectancy. I know you won't watch this, but it's a cartoon and it makes some very comical points. It is in no way offensive, they don't say god is an idiot. They just repeat bible verses and show a visual illustration of what it would look like. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fozZld_fvE8 He didn't do a good job as I figure we are already over-populated by at least 2 billion. This will become more apparent in the next 20 years as water becomes a huge issue. *Unless we make a breakthrough in desalinization plants. Heck, I've been saved as a Christian, as an atheist I have no way of removing this imaginary cross of snow so I guess I'm good then. You know what really just doesn't make sense to me? Why god would send us just to test us out. To make sure he's getting the best deal, I suppose. It just seems so strange to make the universe as extravagant as it is even though it is just preparation for the afterlife. Even though he could have made us already prepared, and seen our future and just went ahead and sent those future generations that would have accepted or denied him to heaven or hell anyway. Well by that reasoning I would be in love with you. I made this website which changed your life (not substantially). Did I do it because I loved you? No, how could I? I didn't even know you existed until you joined the site. Then why does god not show his love? I get what your saying but if atheists were dying at a statistically impressive, higher rate than Christians it would seem those darn atheists were not sowing or enacting godliness. In reality, "god" kills without regard. Tornado alley has a high percentage of Christians, they experience disasters all the time. San Francisco has a sinful population of homosexuals and atheists. They never experience natural disasters! God loves homosexuals and atheists but apparently not Christians (unless he's killing them so they can go to heaven sooner). Please clarify your arguement for this section. I didn't quite understand it. >:O Even then I'm only loving god because I seek reward. I should be able to love god and know I'm going to die and rot in the dirt, never to have my consciousness exist again. That would be true love - on my part. Christians can never truly love god, they can only fear him. Sure it does. The Spanish Inquisition, Galileo, and the dark ages. Trust me, it damns critical thinking. You may not, the church has a very different perspective, though. I believe it is called 'heresy' What about the divorced man. You did not talk about him. He never labeled any sin. Like you said earlier it is inspired word of god, not exact. Maybe homosexuality was just an issue at the time that they had to deal with to get the population going. Like the life expectancy thing. Besides isn't it a "sin" to not stone rebellious sons? And not beat any slaves? So you vote yes on a pro-gay marriage bill?
I see a lot of chemicals and things that we don't entirely understand yet. Ever heard of placebo tests? Doctors do knee surgery on 10 people, and give healing medication to 9 of them. To the tenth guy/gal, they give a sugar pill. Somehow, the person ends up with no more pain or difficulty than any of the other 9. I say this only to encourage my statement that we (the human race) are a lot more ignorant than we think we are. In response to your point with the excrements and the hole and what not, you must understand that doing so in a whole was probably a large improvement from the standard of that day. So lies faith in God for myself and faith in science for you. My evidence says that it hadn't rained. Here is where I say that my answer lies within my faith. I've seen the evidence of God in my own life, and choose to believe that which He has created. You have chosen to believe in science. Nothing more can be said. To be honest, I know *makes the 'zero' sign with fingers* this much about science. I couldn't comment on the situation of the earth at that time. I can only tell you what the Bible says regarding it. I did not claim the Ozone Layer to be water vapor. I said that (what I believe to be) the water surrounding the earth would be similar to what we call the Ozone Layer. That is, in the same place/form. Similarity does not imply congruency. Before the Flood, we see longer lives. After the Flood, we see our length of life decrease. So, whatever be the reason, something of the previous state of the earth made the earth a healthier place to be than it is now. Foremost, I know nothing of science and this particular debate doesn't even pertain to Christianity/God/Bible. You'll undoubtedly win as you can talk circles around me when it comes to science. I formally request it be dropped (after your reply, if you so desire). I didn't watch because I'm setting up for a fish fry and trying to hurry =] However, I'll try to get to it eventually. No promises, though. For you to say that He didn't do a good job, you must be ignoring the results had He not enacted the life length decrease. The negative state of the present does not mean we shouldn't be thankful for how much worse it could be. One of the biggest arguments in the church is the once-saved/always-saved debate. This is so because (from what I've seen) there's no direct address of it in the Bible. For the sake of preventing an unnecessary argument of which I'm not-so-informed, I'll say that I can't comment on your eternity. In the end, God is the judge and I am not. I can only say that living in denial of God (blasphemy) is a one-way ticket to hell. Also, I don't believe God sends us to test us out. He already knows the outcome of our lives. As per the earth's magnificence, I'd say that I don't believe God would create something shabby. He originally created man as a companion. That is why we are created in His image. Our diversion from what He wanted for us is the reason we can go to hell at all. Hell was designed as a place of torture for Satan. As is a place for Satan is a place for his followers. You may not have two gods. You are either Christian or non-Christian. Hell or heaven. There is no gray area. I rambled a bit, but I didn't wanna miss something or leave something too open for counter-post. There is quite a difference in affecting my life and changing the direction in my life. By my choice, I feel that I live a more fulfilled life. I feel at ease. I went from dramatic, over-reacting Derek to calm and collected Derek. That is, for the most part =] I'd like to tell you a story that my Sunday School teacher(of many, many years) told me. He grew up in a small farm town in Tennessee. As a high-school-er, he played football. His girlfriend of years would ride the bus from the next closest town to come see him. The next morning, he would wake up to her waiting for him at his house. Now, the bus only ran between the two towns twice a day. So, in order to be there when he (on average) woke up at 11:00, she rode the bus at 5:00. Wake him up when she got there? No. She waited until he woke up because she knew how tired he must've been. From years of love to generally making him a better person, they were an amazing couple. Both of them were Christians. She died at 17 (if my memory serves me. if not, somewhere close) by driving through a green light. The flaw lied within the drunk driver coming from the side who failed to follow his red light. Guess who paid the price. Too often, you will see a Christian die because of or before a non-Christian. I feel this to be so because God is using the events of life to change those involved. The young, Christian girl is promised a place in heaven. However, the drunk driver (not because he's drunk) is not. God is permitting him a longer life and a life-changing event to alter his goal. God is making the effort to show the non-Christian that He wants what's best for him, and that He is willing to even extend the person's life so that they may have adequate time to see truth. Phew....rambling again. Incorrect. I love God because I've acknowledged that what He has planned for my life is a much more beneficial plan that what I've got. This is me knowing that his presence is superior to my own. Now, what you defined as love (the whole dying, rotting, dirt deal) should undoubtedly be the mindset of Christians. Sadly, even in myself, that is not the case. However, now that you've mentioned that, I'll certainly take it into heavy consideration. These are practices of (supposed) Christians, not Christianity. You spoke of Christianity as an idea, not as a group of people. According to the Bible, we shouldn't 'hate' those of unlike religion. We should not be slow to let them know (respectfully, of course) their state in accordance to our belief, but never should we hate. Such is the state of the homosexual. The act of divorce has been committed and the man is suffering from the results of his action, but he divorce is not a constant. Just because the man is still divorced, he is not divorcing. Leviticus 18:22 If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. Inspired means to the Christian that God spake the words to man. The explanation? Supernatural. None can contest but according to his belief. As per the sins you mentioned, I'm sure those are Old Testament. Many folks fail to realize that the Old Testament was written before Christ's sacrifice and many (what we'd consider vile) things had to be done in order to make peace with God when we sinned. I do not condone it. I recognize it as sin just as any other sin, but neither do I condone the hating of those who practice it. No.
This will be my final reply to you. Why don't you enlighten us, with all of your scientific insight, then. Can you prove that? Lol, "faith" in science. How about we make a few deductions, hm? Trees need water to survive. There was no rain. Humans were herbivores before the flood. HOW?! At the very least quote the idiotic verse that birthed this arguement from hell. Funny thing is, they knew 0 about science when the book was written. They are doing exactly what you are doing. Taking stories and applying them to reality. Of course theirs was spoken and not written so it was a tad bit easier to extrapolate but whatever. It's nonsense. K. I addressed both to be sure so don't lecture me. So basically your taking an arguement from authority...Cool. Well you should. He shouldn't have made a maximum capacity for the earth. Look at all the empty space he left. You'd think he could've done something with it. Well, I can't wait. While we're at why don't we judge the ethics behind genocide and discrimination. Maybe god would like to comment on his involvement in those acts? Don't condescend to me with your bullshit. Us and them. You would think our species would have outgrown this. "Originally created man as a companion" Why? He knew the fall was gonna happen. Just seems to convoluted to me. This debate has gotten so stupid. You had so many good things going for you until your last two posts. Well thank god! Moral of the story, drunk drivers are non-Christian. Blame it on the other guy. But you know what's strange? In the old days god would talk to people, burning bush and what not. Now he kills 17 yr. old girls in the hopes that a drunk driver might repent his evil drinking ways. Of course you'll never know for sure, right? You'll be dead. You need to pay more attention to the old testament. The new testament seems to have gotten in your head. What if he is in court and dies of a heart attack? He died while sinning. Cool. Let's go murder some homosexuals. What is your point? That the bible is an ignorant, bigoted piece of crap? So god isn't love and the bible has contradicted itself at least once. Cool. Such an archaic ritual of blood sacrifice. If god commanded it, god commanded it. It is INFALLIBLE. To say that Jesus changed the law or god's feelings towards the subject is false. Jesus HIMSELF said every jot and tittle of the old testament applies. They're going to do it anyway. Their going to hell, might as well not send them to jail too. They'll get their "just deserts" you just need to ignore it.
Your argument's unravelling a bit Nitrous, don't get too emotional - neither of you are going to convert the other. You still made some good points, but you were a little too aggressive IMO. Here's another question for you Dented, not sure if you'll be able to answer this one either, but here goes. Why did God require animal sacrifice? For example: A wealthy man murders someone, but if he goes out and kills one of his baby goats, then it's all ok. Now, the guy's wealthy and has lots of food, so he didn't need to kill the goat for any other reason than to somehow get rid of his sin. That makes no sense to me. What if he commits adultery the next day? And jealousy the day after that? Just murder an animal each day to remove his sin? How does that please God? God made the animals on the earth for us to take care of didn't he? So why were we supposed to selfishly murder them, and how did doing that remove our original sin of murder or adultery or what have you?
Agreed.... It was not man that killed the first living thing on earth... Want to take bets on who did? It was god... the first Sacrifice was made to Cover the sin of man when they Ate of the tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Now I like to make a point to Nitrous threw NeverlessWonder's question. IT was not the tree that blessed them with understanding Good and Evil it was there sin...but besides that. Its kinda like a tradition for blood to cover the sins' of man. Now I agree with a rich man that Sacrifices a lamb and again commits those sins really hasn't changed at all. (Notice the personal connection Hints) It was more along the lines of sign asking for forgiveness. Check out if you want in the bible the story of Cain and Abel. Now Abel was the first to give back to God Portions of what he gained, and the same with Cain. Now This is the first time Humans Sacrificed In the idea of giving back to God what is rightly his. Now I know this is not totally explained in my shorten text so if you want Read Chapter Gen 4 it covers what I said.... Now back to what I'm saying It was that Abel gave his best to god Not like Cain his left overs. Now to the man that Murders. The Sin committed is Not Forgotten nor is it treated like it never happened. Its Covered like the same example as Adam and Eve Being Naked in the Garden of Eden. Now talking about Sacrifices... Jesus Is a well a Sacrifice as the Lamb. Going to the point of Nitrous came in and said it was the New Testament and what ever... It isn't the new church that has made much of an issue out of Personal relationship with god...Its been there the whole time. If you ever stop reading Carbon dating readouts you may happen to notice it. -Gen 5:24 Enoch walked with God; then he was no more , because God took him away. This was the first man never to die in the bible. It was DUE TO THE Fact His personal Relationship with God. Same with NOAH...which in the Video I noticed, it portrayed A Noah that did not know god...Kinda funny to leave out that part...Or did he mean to? Second Instead of watching a video of something some one made... I would have rather read the bible verses (he so was thought to have quoted in the bible) You can very easy notice that he skipped parts and his jokes showed in the end how stupid the jokes of the altar. Back to my point of Jesus as a Lamb... IN Leviticus the way it is shown is that the only way god can talk to a sinful man is to be covered... I just termed it as covered as a way for you to see where i'm going with this. It's a broken line of communication where for example you have to pay minutes to talk to god...This is a horrible example but it is one never the less. The lamb as innocent as it is was slain for to bridge the gap of a sinful man and a holy god. Now again compare how this links Jesus as a lamb is he was slain as a never ending Sacrifice so that we wouldn't have to kill a new lamb every time we needed for forgiveness of our sins.... This is a big subject to explain but I'm trying to explain only what I know... (I like Neverless's questions better then Nitrous's because Nitrous doesn't give me a choice in the matter) Puns for predetermination .... lol Nitrous I will reply to you once I found some Bib references... to back me up.
I'm sorry about that. I just hate it when people tell me I'm going to hell. Don't know why. It must be my Christian years upsurging OK, tree, fruit, sin - it's all the same. Eating from the tree caused the sin, which caused the realization of good and evil. You didn't answer the question you only made it one step longer. Why did god punish Adam and Eve for the sin of eating the fruit which caused the knowledge good and evil to fill them? Surely he only punished their naivety. You bastard! Those are highly interesting schematics. That may be one reference in support, after the fact. Before the protestant reformation, no one thought of a personal relationship with god. You went to the Pope who went through god. That's history, you can't change that, however, hindsight bias allows you to find evidence in support more easily than before because your mind has essentially programmed itself to find a supporting arguement whether it is or not actually supporting it. --Was that a run on sentence? Through reading the old testament (and new, I'm just more familiar with the old...I was Church of Christ, don't dog me ) you find sacrifice, golden arks and tablets from god to convey what you should do. It was fairly obvious that god laid the rules, you followed them and went to heaven. You didn't have to talk to god at night before bed time, that was saved for the sabbath. While I haven't read about Enoch and he may have had a personal relationship with god, it wasn't fully realized until the Protestant reformation. I'm not saying having a relationship with god is wrong, it's just that it would have been uncommon. I'd like to ask a question. Out of 6 billion people, does no one have a stronger personal relationship with god, other than Enoch? And if so, why have they not been whisked to heaven without dying like him? Thanks in advance.
Wow, Nitrous. Sad to say that you displayed no form of gentlemanly attitude. Pretty low and even worse, unexpected, bro. Moving on, I'll do the best I can with you, NW. The sacrifice of animals was for the godly, I believe. That is, those who sought true repentance to God were able to achieve such through that method. Old Testament methods are something I'm still learning a lot about, but I'm almost positive that the state of the heart of the human in question weighed heavier than the state of the animal to be sacrificed. Make any sense?
Well, you have to look at many things. How do you gauge the level of that relationship? Is the relationship based on objectives or is it subjective for each person? How is one Christian better than another and they both follow God's will? That aside, obviously you have to reduce that number of 6 billion because well not everyone including yourself proclaim to be a follower of Christ. Let's just say about 25% of the world's population are true believers. Personally I would put that percentage lower, but that's just me. Out of that 25%, how would anyone know. There is no knowable answer unless physical evidence rendered itself in which case you would get a definitive answer. Anyways, I think you mainly want to know if God would ever suck someone up into heaven on a fiery chariot in this day and age. I'd say no for some reasons I need to investigate further and some I'll explain. We can't control God, our actions do not cause him to react. So, someone's spirituality doesn't dictate what God's actions. Basically God knows and has always known what his actions are and how we will react to them. From what I know, people of the OT didn't have much a personal relationship with God, because they sinned. God, however, revealed himself through manifestations to His people. After Christ's sacrifice, we now have an open channel if you will to God. We also have the Holy Spirit, which people of the OT did not have. I'm going to have to take a look back on Enoch's life, culture of the OT, how the Holy Spirit works, and a bunch of other stuff to fully and satisfactorily (at least for me) answer your question. Which is a good one but not an important one. Bottom line God is inscrutible and incomprehensible. We won't, can't, don't always know or understand why God does what He does or who He is. A lot of that has to do with the fact that God is illogical, he doesn't think, because He knows everything.
God...hahaha funny anyways, god is supposidly also omnipotent, which is a contradictory in itsself lets go to the rock theory... if the bible says god is omnipotent, which it clearly does, then can he create a rock that he himself cannot lift? if he cannot lift said rock, then he cannot be omnipotent if he cannot create the rock, then he is also not omnipotent nothing can be omnipotent. and if this is wrong, what else in the bible is wrong....id say most of it oh, and a good point the new movie Religiolous makes is that if god can vanquish the devil and save humanity, why doesnt he, or is he just evil, which actually promotes your theory
I don't need to gauge and neither to do you. God is the objective "rock." If Enoch was good enough, surely, someone has had to be good enough by now. A saint, a pope, even an average joe. You also have to think about the deceased and past humans as well. So 6 billion is close, yes? Yeah. Maybe not in a chariot, just whisked away like Enoch. k. (Wasted quote ) To your knowledge at least. Angels were creations of god and Lucifer seems to have achieved the upper hand on god, in that he has become his own separate entity by not being affected by god. In the way that he actually has the ability to wage "war" against god. Well, how could the holy spirit not exist? He's god...I mean...what? Think - to have a conscious mind, to some extent of reasoning, remembering experiences, making rational decisions. God is not conscious, he does not reason, he does not remember, and he does not make rational decisions. Wow. That's really something you've got there. *The sarcasm is so thick right now, you don't even know. *
Ahh the rock theory... Bascially it's a statement of ignorance about who God is. Let me give you the correct definition of Omnipotence, because what you apparently know is so limited. God wont ever even attempt a feat like that because it is against His nature to do so, as well as sinning. God can't sin. I'm sorry if you think that argument is highly philosophical but it is an invalid argument as it doesn't apply to who God is.
+having unlimited authority or influence the official definition of omnipotent according to the merriam-webster dictionary and if it is not a highly philosophical argument, then why did one of the most highly regarded philosiphers, Socrates, origionally script the argument? whoever wrote the bible, i forget who, was smart. he realized that he had scripted of a figure that contradicts himself, so he fixed it. the bible s actually a good book, in some aspects. it is a book of principles to live your life by. that is what it was wrote for, and people, blind of faith, took it the wrong way. so good luck with your blind faith. more... what proof do you have that god exists? P.S. i have nothing against religious people, as i have a close friend whos dad is a missionary and another who is a devout catholic.
You're using an online dictionary to describe God. Try using the Bible to describe God -I mean it is His word- and you'll see why the definition I gave is much better suited. Yes it is something to think about up until you realize that it is not a valid argument. Let me give you an expanse in knowledge my friend. I'll try and condense this next part as seamlessly as possible. The Bible was written by 40 different authors over a period of 1500 years on three different continents. The authors were from diverse backgrounds and in many different circumstances. The result is a completely unified and harmonious work. How did it come to be written? Through Verbal Plenary Inspiration(1). What is inspiration? The Bible is the good book. The funny thing is, is that the Bible was not written in a doctrinal outline. So that contradicts your idea of what it was written for.
an outline is the format in which a book is written, which is socially accepted. formats dont always have to stay the same, seeing as this is thousands of years ago, it was and is subject to change depending on the status of sociaty your entire theory is based upon facts that cannot be proven whatsoever. it is based on the word of 40 different people who happen to agree with each other and continued writing a book one of the others started. they could have also possibly modified the previous writings depending on the time frame. also, the catholic church during the enlightment has been proven to have changed at least parts of the bible from its previous writing. the bible, if i am correct but it may have been a different language, was origionally written in latin. upon the enlightment due to the prior decrease in literacy and knowladge allowed only high ranking officials that either were integrated into the church or were connected and relied upon the church could read latin. once people started faalling back to religion, the catholic church had to translate the bible, and then changed pieces to persuade more people to go to church so they would earn more money. so tell me, what was origionally written in the bible may not even be what is currently circulating, so is it possible that what you read is not the origional, because due to the high amounts of corruption in the enlightment, it is highly probable. actually, it was the print dictionary anyways, as i said previously, the bible is not a rustworthy source. and why would god's definition of omnipotence different then the socially acclaimed one? people say "if god does not exist, ten how does the earth?" -"big bang" -where did the particles come from? -where did god come from?/ -he was just there -what if those particles or the earth was just there? -You cannot prove god exists -you cannot disproce it either -if i said that there was a giant sphagetti moster, would you believe it existed just because you couldnt disprove it? anyways; rusty eagle, i like u bcuz arguing is fun, and i do it wit all my friends no matter the topic. i like you as long as you... -practice what you preach and accept all despite their religion -are not one of those devout religious people that cannot go two sentences without quoting the bible or praising the lord (not because f their religion, only bcuz they are annoying as crap and i hate speaking with them)