Total Posts:22|Showing Posts:1-22
Jump to topic:

Found. The tree of knowledge of good and evil

GreatestIam
Posts: 1,723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2011 10:58:39 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Found. The tree of knowledge of good and evil.

In the only place it could be found. In the Bible.

I will assume here that those who compiled the books of the Bible knew what they were doing, in terms of giving us a myth with a moral lesson.

God is said to be the Alpha and the Omega. The beginning and the end. Bible God is to be at the top and bottom of any attribute we can think of for God. He is to be our example of the greatest love as well as the greatest hate. After all, he does set the standards of what is good and what is evil.

The Bible tells us not to add or subtract from it and to use it as it's own judge. If we are to do so then we must judge what is in it as good or evil. FMPOV, the O T shows God's evil side and the N T shows God's good side. Most recognize this and this is why the emphasis is on following Jesus and not the barbaric God of the O T. IOW, the O T is the evil side of the tree of knowledge while the N T is the good side of the tree of knowledge.

Many that follow the Bible God recognize this. Literalists and fundamentals do not. They end up venerating the evil side of God, the O T, as well as the good side, Jesus and the N T, when they are supposed to be rejecting the God of evil in the O T.

Literalists and fundamentals can thus be seen as immature thinkers and true sheep. While Christians who recognize the evil in the God of the O T can be seen as better thinkers and able to discern good from evil. Literalist can be seen as poor thinkers who cannot discern evil. They end up with a theology that embraces everything from genocide to infanticide as long as God is doing it. Arguably an immoral position.

This is how literalists and fundamentals all end up hurting their parent religions.

If, as I stated, that the O T of the Bible should be seen as the evil side of the tree of knowledge and God, then the tree of life should be near. I submit that it is also within the Bible but that it has nothing to do with eternal life. Nowhere in the Bible is the great lose of this tree of immortality bemoaned. Yet to many, it is the most important aspect of the Bible. I think we can trust scriptures, when they speak of a tree of life, and only means a good life and not an eternal one.

Literalists and fundamentals thus end up having much work to do on their morals because they are hindered by the notion that they should be embracing and honoring an evil God.

In effect, from a biblical standpoint, they are the Anti-Christ, as they continue to venerate evil.

Who do you follow, the good God of the N T, or the evil God of the O T?

Reading the Bible as I do, and seeing it as containing the tree of knowledge and the tree of life, make this book all inclusive in and of itself and in that way, I am true to the authors and compilers who said not to add or subtract anything from it. It was meant to show a complete story and God and I think that reading it as I do is the only way to understand the full story. God thus become the epitome of both good and evil. As it should be for a God who takes responsibility. Mythically speaking that is.

Regards
DL
inferno
Posts: 10,689
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2011 11:02:10 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/1/2011 10:58:39 AM, GreatestIam wrote:
Found. The tree of knowledge of good and evil.

In the only place it could be found. In the Bible.

I will assume here that those who compiled the books of the Bible knew what they were doing, in terms of giving us a myth with a moral lesson.

God is said to be the Alpha and the Omega. The beginning and the end. Bible God is to be at the top and bottom of any attribute we can think of for God. He is to be our example of the greatest love as well as the greatest hate. After all, he does set the standards of what is good and what is evil.

The Bible tells us not to add or subtract from it and to use it as it's own judge. If we are to do so then we must judge what is in it as good or evil. FMPOV, the O T shows God's evil side and the N T shows God's good side. Most recognize this and this is why the emphasis is on following Jesus and not the barbaric God of the O T. IOW, the O T is the evil side of the tree of knowledge while the N T is the good side of the tree of knowledge.

Many that follow the Bible God recognize this. Literalists and fundamentals do not. They end up venerating the evil side of God, the O T, as well as the good side, Jesus and the N T, when they are supposed to be rejecting the God of evil in the O T.

Literalists and fundamentals can thus be seen as immature thinkers and true sheep. While Christians who recognize the evil in the God of the O T can be seen as better thinkers and able to discern good from evil. Literalist can be seen as poor thinkers who cannot discern evil. They end up with a theology that embraces everything from genocide to infanticide as long as God is doing it. Arguably an immoral position.

This is how literalists and fundamentals all end up hurting their parent religions.

If, as I stated, that the O T of the Bible should be seen as the evil side of the tree of knowledge and God, then the tree of life should be near. I submit that it is also within the Bible but that it has nothing to do with eternal life. Nowhere in the Bible is the great lose of this tree of immortality bemoaned. Yet to many, it is the most important aspect of the Bible. I think we can trust scriptures, when they speak of a tree of life, and only means a good life and not an eternal one.

Literalists and fundamentals thus end up having much work to do on their morals because they are hindered by the notion that they should be embracing and honoring an evil God.

In effect, from a biblical standpoint, they are the Anti-Christ, as they continue to venerate evil.

Who do you follow, the good God of the N T, or the evil God of the O T?

Reading the Bible as I do, and seeing it as containing the tree of knowledge and the tree of life, make this book all inclusive in and of itself and in that way, I am true to the authors and compilers who said not to add or subtract anything from it. It was meant to show a complete story and God and I think that reading it as I do is the only way to understand the full story. God thus become the epitome of both good and evil. As it should be for a God who takes responsibility. Mythically speaking that is.

Regards
DL

You know absolutely nothing about the tree of knowledge.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2011 11:03:38 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/1/2011 10:58:39 AM, GreatestIam wrote:
Found. The tree of knowledge of good and evil.

In the only place it could be found. In the Bible.

I will assume here that those who compiled the books of the Bible knew what they were doing, in terms of giving us a myth with a moral lesson.

Why would you assume that? They were neolithic goat herders. They most certainly did not know what they were doing.


God is said to be the Alpha and the Omega. The beginning and the end. Bible God is to be at the top and bottom of any attribute we can think of for God. He is to be our example of the greatest love as well as the greatest hate. After all, he does set the standards of what is good and what is evil.

The Bible tells us not to add or subtract from it and to use it as it's own judge. If we are to do so then we must judge what is in it as good or evil. FMPOV, the O T shows God's evil side and the N T shows God's good side. Most recognize this and this is why the emphasis is on following Jesus and not the barbaric God of the O T. IOW, the O T is the evil side of the tree of knowledge while the N T is the good side of the tree of knowledge.

Many that follow the Bible God recognize this. Literalists and fundamentals do not. They end up venerating the evil side of God, the O T, as well as the good side, Jesus and the N T, when they are supposed to be rejecting the God of evil in the O T.

Literalists and fundamentals can thus be seen as immature thinkers and true sheep. While Christians who recognize the evil in the God of the O T can be seen as better thinkers and able to discern good from evil. Literalist can be seen as poor thinkers who cannot discern evil. They end up with a theology that embraces everything from genocide to infanticide as long as God is doing it. Arguably an immoral position.

This is how literalists and fundamentals all end up hurting their parent religions.

If, as I stated, that the O T of the Bible should be seen as the evil side of the tree of knowledge and God, then the tree of life should be near. I submit that it is also within the Bible but that it has nothing to do with eternal life. Nowhere in the Bible is the great lose of this tree of immortality bemoaned. Yet to many, it is the most important aspect of the Bible. I think we can trust scriptures, when they speak of a tree of life, and only means a good life and not an eternal one.

Literalists and fundamentals thus end up having much work to do on their morals because they are hindered by the notion that they should be embracing and honoring an evil God.

In effect, from a biblical standpoint, they are the Anti-Christ, as they continue to venerate evil.

Who do you follow, the good God of the N T, or the evil God of the O T?

Reading the Bible as I do, and seeing it as containing the tree of knowledge and the tree of life, make this book all inclusive in and of itself and in that way, I am true to the authors and compilers who said not to add or subtract anything from it. It was meant to show a complete story and God and I think that reading it as I do is the only way to understand the full story. God thus become the epitome of both good and evil. As it should be for a God who takes responsibility. Mythically speaking that is.

Regards
DL
GreatestIam
Posts: 1,723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2011 12:39:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/1/2011 11:02:10 AM, inferno wrote:

You know absolutely nothing about the tree of knowledge.

Chastisement without correction is plain old cruelty.
Thanks for showing your stripes. You must be Christian.

Regards
DL
GreatestIam
Posts: 1,723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2011 12:43:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/1/2011 11:03:38 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 11/1/2011 10:58:39 AM, GreatestIam wrote:
Found. The tree of knowledge of good and evil.

In the only place it could be found. In the Bible.

I will assume here that those who compiled the books of the Bible knew what they were doing, in terms of giving us a myth with a moral lesson.

Why would you assume that? They were neolithic goat herders. They most certainly did not know what they were doing.



Spoken like one who knows nothing of history.
When was democracy born?

Regards
DL
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2011 12:49:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/1/2011 12:43:11 PM, GreatestIam wrote:
At 11/1/2011 11:03:38 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 11/1/2011 10:58:39 AM, GreatestIam wrote:
Found. The tree of knowledge of good and evil.

In the only place it could be found. In the Bible.

I will assume here that those who compiled the books of the Bible knew what they were doing, in terms of giving us a myth with a moral lesson.

Why would you assume that? They were neolithic goat herders. They most certainly did not know what they were doing.



Spoken like one who knows nothing of history.
When was democracy born?

Regards
DL

Well, if I know nothing of history, then it seems silly to ask my such questions.
Mikeee
Posts: 234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2011 2:48:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/1/2011 12:43:11 PM, GreatestIam wrote:
At 11/1/2011 11:03:38 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 11/1/2011 10:58:39 AM, GreatestIam wrote:
Found. The tree of knowledge of good and evil.

In the only place it could be found. In the Bible.

I will assume here that those who compiled the books of the Bible knew what they were doing, in terms of giving us a myth with a moral lesson.

Why would you assume that? They were neolithic goat herders. They most certainly did not know what they were doing.



Spoken like one who knows nothing of history.
When was democracy born?

Regards
DL

He's right, when the book of Genesis was written, only a few people knew about it, and to them it was like passing down family stories. Are there somethings incorrect in the bible, certainly, does what mean we should dismiss it entirely, no. If you know so much about history; who wrote (most of) the book of Genesis (its a book, I hope you don't dismiss its existence), and when was it written?

If the tree of knowledge was created by God, it can be destroyed by God. Why would God leave such power in the hands of man if they turned against him (by creating original sin).

If the tree of knowledge is in the garden of Eden, where has that gone; it defiantly has not been found yet.

My theory; the garden was destroyed after the flood of Noah's ark and the flood created a new body of water (Persian Gulf), hiding any remains of it. If a flood did happen, there is more to early history that we see...
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2011 3:03:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
The story of the Garden of Eden is a parable, it never was meant to be taken literally.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Crede
Posts: 455
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2011 3:19:58 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Lets just say that the Garden of Eden was literal. I was thinking last night that it is possible that Adam in Even were kicked out of the Garden in a different manner than you first believe when you read the story. In stead of them being sent out of the Garden, the Garden was taken out of this world (into heaven) and left Adam and Eve here now in the broken world they helped manifest. This is just a thought and maybe completely false as well as young Earth creation might be false. But it does work in the idea of geography and for God to make it so no man could find it...because it is now dislocated from our physical realm.
GreatestIam
Posts: 1,723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2011 3:21:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/1/2011 2:48:18 PM, Mikeee wrote:
At 11/1/2011 12:43:11 PM, GreatestIam wrote:
At 11/1/2011 11:03:38 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 11/1/2011 10:58:39 AM, GreatestIam wrote:
Found. The tree of knowledge of good and evil.

In the only place it could be found. In the Bible.

I will assume here that those who compiled the books of the Bible knew what they were doing, in terms of giving us a myth with a moral lesson.

Why would you assume that? They were neolithic goat herders. They most certainly did not know what they were doing.



Spoken like one who knows nothing of history.
When was democracy born?

Regards
DL

He's right, when the book of Genesis was written, only a few people knew about it, and to them it was like passing down family stories. Are there somethings incorrect in the bible, certainly, does what mean we should dismiss it entirely, no. If you know so much about history; who wrote (most of) the book of Genesis (its a book, I hope you don't dismiss its existence), and when was it written?

If the tree of knowledge was created by God, it can be destroyed by God. Why would God leave such power in the hands of man if they turned against him (by creating original sin).

If the tree of knowledge is in the garden of Eden, where has that gone; it defiantly has not been found yet.

My theory; the garden was destroyed after the flood of Noah's ark and the flood created a new body of water (Persian Gulf), hiding any remains of it. If a flood did happen, there is more to early history that we see...

I said nothing of rejecting scriptures. I am showing how they should be read for a better understanding and give more intelligence to the writers and compilers than most who do not believe in the myth of the Bible God.

Geologically speaking, the location of the mythical garden has yet to be found.
Even if we found the actual location, how would we know it was the place that the myth was centered in.

Only fools would actually believe in a real tree of life or talking snakes and cherubims.

This link speaks to the flood you theorized on.

Regards
DL
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2011 6:36:15 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/1/2011 3:03:39 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
The story of the Garden of Eden is a parable, it never was meant to be taken literally.

Interesting. I've heard this said many times. I'm wondering, what methodology did you use to determine the intentions of the author of Genesis?
Mikeee
Posts: 234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2011 6:51:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I said nothing of rejecting scriptures. I am showing how they should be read for a better understanding and give more intelligence to the writers and compilers than most who do not believe in the myth of the Bible God.

Geologically speaking, the location of the mythical garden has yet to be found.
Even if we found the actual location, how would we know it was the place that the myth was centered in.

Only fools would actually believe in a real tree of life or talking snakes and cherubims.

This link speaks to the flood you theorized on.


Regards
DL

I'm not saying I believe in the "mystical powers" of the bible, but I do believe there was a garden, a place called Eden, and Adam and Eve. I do not believe that there was anything "magical" about the garden. You are claiming that because there is no tree of knowledge, the rest cannot exist, but it can.

If there was proof that Jesus did not rise from the dead that does not mean He did not exist. If he is not really God, he still existed, just not as some "magical" being...

In Indiana Jones they find the lost arch. I believe there is an arch, but I do not believe that it has any magical powers. Exist yes, magical, probably not.

If you take out all of the godly acts that Jesus did (as descried in the New Testament), the book is still an accurate biography of Jesus, its actual evidence.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2011 6:53:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/1/2011 6:36:15 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 11/1/2011 3:03:39 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
The story of the Garden of Eden is a parable, it never was meant to be taken literally.

Interesting. I've heard this said many times. I'm wondering, what methodology did you use to determine the intentions of the author of Genesis?

While it is impossible to know for certain, I feel that the blatant use of symbolism and patently ridiculous elements make it very likely.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
GreatestIam
Posts: 1,723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/2/2011 8:16:00 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/1/2011 6:36:15 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 11/1/2011 3:03:39 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
The story of the Garden of Eden is a parable, it never was meant to be taken literally.

Interesting. I've heard this said many times. I'm wondering, what methodology did you use to determine the intentions of the author of Genesis?

I go to the actual authors and authority for judgments of the O T. The Jews.
They interpreted Eden as man's elevation and not his fall.
When Christianity usurped the Jewish God, they reversed much of what the original writers thought.

http://www.mrrena.com...

No fall. No original sin. Christians found that there was more $$$$$$$$$$ in guilt than in elevation.

Regards
DL
GreatestIam
Posts: 1,723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/2/2011 8:22:01 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/1/2011 6:51:09 PM, Mikeee wrote:
I:
If you take out all of the godly acts that Jesus did (as descried in the New Testament), the book is still an accurate biography of Jesus, its actual evidence.

I give the word evidence a different meaning than you do.

Strange that if Jesus was real, it took the ancients 300 years to tie him to God and the trinity concept and here you are 1600yrs later talking like he was real because there is no evidence against his reality which is a logical fallacy.

Oh well.
Go ahead and believe that a book that begins with a talking snake and ends with a seven headed monster is talking about real people.

Regards
DL
gr33k_fr33k5
Posts: 321
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/2/2011 11:05:59 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
The old testament doesn't show God's "evil" side. . . to pull that from scripture shows profound ignorance on your part. The OT shows man's evil nature and inability to achieve perfection even when they know the rules/laws. The NT shows the answer that God provided to our own sinfulness.

Regarding the idea that God is both sides of the spectrum, then God would have to be in both Heaven and Hell, he would have no place as the perfect judge (read revelations) because his conflicting natures would prevent him from judging fairly. . .
I am free, free indeed!

ignorance is bliss
GreatestIam
Posts: 1,723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/2/2011 11:39:20 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/2/2011 11:05:59 AM, gr33k_fr33k5 wrote:
The old testament doesn't show God's "evil" side. . . to pull that from scripture shows profound ignorance on your part. The OT shows man's evil nature and inability to achieve perfection even when they know the rules/laws. The NT shows the answer that God provided to our own sinfulness.


Yes. By having his own son murdered when there was no need for it.
Scripture clearly shows him forgiving sin without it.

And you promote such a fool of a God. Insanity.

You are calling evil good. Not good discernment friend.


Regarding the idea that God is both sides of the spectrum, then God would have to be in both Heaven and Hell, he would have no place as the perfect judge (read revelations) because his conflicting natures would prevent him from judging fairly. . .

Hmm.

Ps 139 8
If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.

How do you manage to fathom so much of your unfathomable God to know what effects him or not. Smooth. How can you know the un-knowable?

Break the first commandment for us and show whose name you would put above God's for the attribute of evil.

Regards
DL
gr33k_fr33k5
Posts: 321
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/2/2011 11:49:53 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/2/2011 11:39:20 AM, GreatestIam wrote:
At 11/2/2011 11:05:59 AM, gr33k_fr33k5 wrote:
The old testament doesn't show God's "evil" side. . . to pull that from scripture shows profound ignorance on your part. The OT shows man's evil nature and inability to achieve perfection even when they know the rules/laws. The NT shows the answer that God provided to our own sinfulness.


Yes. By having his own son murdered when there was no need for it.
Scripture clearly shows him forgiving sin without it.

And you promote such a fool of a God. Insanity.

You are calling evil good. Not good discernment friend.


Jesus could forgive sins because while on earth he had crossed the great divide. . . regardless, God didn't have his son murdered you're just appealing to emotions and using inflammatory language. . . Jesus did this of His own free will . .. not because he was forced into it.


Regarding the idea that God is both sides of the spectrum, then God would have to be in both Heaven and Hell, he would have no place as the perfect judge (read revelations) because his conflicting natures would prevent him from judging fairly. . .

Hmm.

Ps 139 8
If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.

How do you manage to fathom so much of your unfathomable God to know what effects him or not. Smooth. How can you know the un-knowable?

Break the first commandment for us and show whose name you would put above God's for the attribute of evil.

Regards
DL

I mis spoke, God being both good and evil would mean he is being punished in Hell and being exalted in heaven . . . God is "in" Hell, however he is acting as the punisher, not the punished . .. . my bad.
I am free, free indeed!

ignorance is bliss
Mikeee
Posts: 234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/2/2011 1:55:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/2/2011 8:22:01 AM, GreatestIam wrote:

I give the word evidence a different meaning than you do.

Strange that if Jesus was real, it took the ancients 300 years to tie him to God and the trinity concept and here you are 1600yrs later talking like he was real because there is no evidence against his reality which is a logical fallacy.

Oh well.
Go ahead and believe that a book that begins with a talking snake and ends with a seven headed monster is talking about real people.

Regards
DL

Your not being rational. You are saying that because of the rest of the nature of the bible, all parts are false. When I look at Revelations, I don't believe most of it. Psalms are actual Poems written by actual people, the Gospel is are stories about Jesus, and with disregard of the "magic", it is a primary source for what was going on in the Years 30-30 CE. Some books of the bible seem (to me at least) utterly false, some are true, and some are borderline. The bible is a compilation of writings written by many different people, from different places, during different times.

Some people read books for the story, some read for meaning and allusions to life, so read it as a biography; A story or book, like the Bible, is what ever you make of it. No matter what you think or believe, there is a Bible with stories, regardless of weather or not they are true.

Jesus did not talk only about religion, he talked about everyday values and how you should live your life, such as the golden rule; due unto others as you would have then do unto you. Like Confucius, Jesus address how one should behave. When you hear the saying, do what Jesus would do, it does not mean walk on water and preform miracles, it means live your life with his set of values.

If Jesus did not exist, then who do the Gospels refer to, more than 4 books with basically the same story cannot all be made up....
GreatestIam
Posts: 1,723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/2/2011 3:24:49 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/2/2011 11:49:53 AM, gr33k_fr33k5 wrote:
At 11/2/2011 11:39:20 AM, GreatestIam wrote:
At 11/2/2011 11:05:59 AM, gr33k_fr33k5 wrote:
The old testament doesn't show God's "evil" side. . . to pull that from scripture shows profound ignorance on your part. The OT shows man's evil nature and inability to achieve perfection even when they know the rules/laws. The NT shows the answer that God provided to our own sinfulness.


Yes. By having his own son murdered when there was no need for it.
Scripture clearly shows him forgiving sin without it.

And you promote such a fool of a God. Insanity.

You are calling evil good. Not good discernment friend.


Jesus could forgive sins because while on earth he had crossed the great divide. . . regardless, God didn't have his son murdered you're just appealing to emotions and using inflammatory language. . . Jesus did this of His own free will . .. not because he was forced into it.


Regarding the idea that God is both sides of the spectrum, then God would have to be in both Heaven and Hell, he would have no place as the perfect judge (read revelations) because his conflicting natures would prevent him from judging fairly. . .

Hmm.

Ps 139 8
If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.

How do you manage to fathom so much of your unfathomable God to know what effects him or not. Smooth. How can you know the un-knowable?

Break the first commandment for us and show whose name you would put above God's for the attribute of evil.

Regards
DL

I mis spoke, God being both good and evil would mean he is being punished in Hell and being exalted in heaven . . . God is "in" Hell, however he is acting as the punisher, not the punished . .. . my bad.

That is not what your word says.
It says that Jesus was sent. His own words.
Further, you ignore God ever so famous plan.

If you prefer to think of Jesus' death as suicide then go ahead. It would then be a self aggrandizing act and God would reject such.

As to God the punisher. No such thing. Get the quote or recant.

Matthew 25:41 (Jesus speaking):Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

Note that it does not say prepared for God.

Also note below what God thinks of your ideas of his accepting a ransom.
Especially one that he set himself and that means he orchestrated sis own son's murder.

Ezekiel 18:20
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Psalm 49:7
None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:

Regards
DL
GreatestIam
Posts: 1,723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/2/2011 3:32:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/2/2011 1:55:42 PM, Mikeee wrote:
At 11/2/2011 8:22:01 AM, GreatestIam wrote:

I give the word evidence a different meaning than you do.

Strange that if Jesus was real, it took the ancients 300 years to tie him to God and the trinity concept and here you are 1600yrs later talking like he was real because there is no evidence against his reality which is a logical fallacy.

Oh well.
Go ahead and believe that a book that begins with a talking snake and ends with a seven headed monster is talking about real people.

Regards
DL

Your not being rational. You are saying that because of the rest of the nature of the bible, all parts are false. When I look at Revelations, I don't believe most of it. Psalms are actual Poems written by actual people, the Gospel is are stories about Jesus, and with disregard of the "magic", it is a primary source for what was going on in the Years 30-30 CE. Some books of the bible seem (to me at least) utterly false, some are true, and some are borderline. The bible is a compilation of writings written by many different people, from different places, during different times.

Some people read books for the story, some read for meaning and allusions to life, so read it as a biography; A story or book, like the Bible, is what ever you make of it. No matter what you think or believe, there is a Bible with stories, regardless of weather or not they are true.

Jesus did not talk only about religion, he talked about everyday values and how you should live your life, such as the golden rule; due unto others as you would have then do unto you. Like Confucius, Jesus address how one should behave. When you hear the saying, do what Jesus would do, it does not mean walk on water and preform miracles, it means live your life with his set of values.

If Jesus did not exist, then who do the Gospels refer to, more than 4 books with basically the same story cannot all be made up....

Really?

Not to the foremost scholars of today. Led by Bart Ehrman.
He shows how most of the N T is forged and how the gospels were copied from each other.
He also has the majority and consensus on his side.

If you are going to judge the veracity of Jesus then you have to judge him on his sayings and most of those are unworkable rhetoric.

One glaring bit of foolishness is his take on divorce. Let no man put asunder.

What do you think of life with no way to divorce?

Regards
DL
Mikeee
Posts: 234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/2/2011 4:54:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/2/2011 3:32:54 PM, GreatestIam wrote:
Really?

Not to the foremost scholars of today. Led by Bart Ehrman.
He shows how most of the N T is forged and how the gospels were copied from each other.
He also has the majority and consensus on his side.

If you are going to judge the veracity of Jesus then you have to judge him on his sayings and most of those are unworkable rhetoric.

One glaring bit of foolishness is his take on divorce. Let no man put asunder.

What do you think of life with no way to divorce?

Regards
DL

The Gospels were written by the followers of Jesus, and there are more than 4, only 4 are in the New Testament. Of course they are going to be the same, they saw the same things, and the were writing about the same person, it would be troublesome if they were different.

You judge Jesus' existence on what he did (humanly, not "magically"). If the Gospel says Jesus was at a certain place during a certain time, you can take other sources form the place and time, and some of them, that have nothing to do with the bible or God, mention Jesus. Roman accounts mention Jesus and his followers, therefore he must have existed...

I am not Catholic, I do not believe in Jesus (as a God or Prophet), but I do believe a Jesus of Nazareth existed (as only man, not God), and he was a social reformist and philosopher of his time.

I have my own faith, so I do not have an issue with what Jesus said about divorce. I will say this; during the time of Jesus, society was patriarchal and women had little rights. Men could divorce women but women had to be subordinate to men, and could only divorce on their term by proving that her husband did not take care of her, even then, women divorcing men was uncommon. If a Man committed adultery, he had to pay a fine, if a women committed adultery, she could be stoned. Because of the injustice between sexes, Jesus was standing up or equality and social reform. It was a societal issue, I fail to see how it is a religious matter.

I don't care if you believe Jesus was the son of God or a prophet of some sort, but its just illogical to deny the existence of someone based on religious teachings, if you want to disprove his existence do it via evidence of historical accounts. Confucius was a real person, a philosopher and social reformist, he just didn't make claims to having relation to God, other than that, Jesus and Confucius have a lot in common, in terms of what they did with their human life.