Total Posts:48|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Explain God

smelisox
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 1:18:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
How is he three people at once? I never understood that.

Also a few traditional questions:

For you old testamenters, why did he put a big tree in Eden specifically where Adam and Eve were, with very enticing fruit that they can't eat? It's like putting a big red button there.

If God is peace loving why did he burn Soddom to the ground?

Explain how confession boxes are ok

Cheers!
Geogeer
Posts: 4,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 1:32:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 1:18:12 PM, smelisox wrote:
How is he three people at once? I never understood that.

Nobody really does, that is why it is a mystery. God is of a different nature than creation, and thus we cannot fully comprehend it.

Also a few traditional questions:

For you old testamenters, why did he put a big tree in Eden specifically where Adam and Eve were, with very enticing fruit that they can't eat? It's like putting a big red button there.

God gave us free will. Thus he must provide a means for us not to obey him - otherwise we don't have free will. That and it it allegorical in nature.

If God is peace loving why did he burn Soddom to the ground?

God is love. Soddom was a place that had abandoned love. Pure conjecture here, but perhaps any further soul that would have come from those people would have been damned and thus is was better that they die than be permitted to continue to live.

Explain how confession boxes are ok

They are better than OK they are great!
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,652
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 1:36:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 1:18:12 PM, smelisox wrote:
How is he three people at once? I never understood that.

It's kinda like H2O, it can be liquid, solid or gas, just not at all at once.

Sometimes God is cold as ice, unfeeling, indifferent and unconcerned for the well being of his creation when it matters most.

Sometimes God flows like water, always changing direction and trying to envelop and conform to the world around us, but only tends to create more friction as one tries to move through it.

Most times, though, God is like steam, just basically a whole lot of hot air being funneled through a spout that tends to sound like noise.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,652
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 2:13:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 1:32:02 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/1/2015 1:18:12 PM, smelisox wrote:
How is he three people at once? I never understood that.

Nobody really does, that is why it is a mystery. God is of a different nature than creation, and thus we cannot fully comprehend it.

What is even more difficult to comprehend is why anyone would devout themselves to a completely incomprehensible mystery?

Also a few traditional questions:

For you old testamenters, why did he put a big tree in Eden specifically where Adam and Eve were, with very enticing fruit that they can't eat? It's like putting a big red button there.

God gave us free will. Thus he must provide a means for us not to obey him - otherwise we don't have free will. That and it it allegorical in nature.

The error in logic there is that free will has been offered to man, which is the freedom to go out and use his own will to guide him. God, as the teacher of the man would only offer free will if He was satisfied that He had taught man everything He could teach. To make such an offer and then punish man for accepting it only serves to show the teacher is petty and selfish and had no intention of any valid or credible offers.

Using free will is not the same as disobeying God, they are mutually exclusive. Man can only disobey God if he uses his free will to commit atrocities to his fellow man, but if he uses his free will to lead a good life, he is obeying Gods will and should be rewarded.

That is logic in nature.

If God is peace loving why did he burn Soddom to the ground?

God is love. Soddom was a place that had abandoned love. Pure conjecture here, but perhaps any further soul that would have come from those people would have been damned and thus is was better that they die than be permitted to continue to live.

There are so many things wrong with that line of reasoning.

First of all, you contradict yourself when you say "God is love" right after telling us God is an incomprehensible mystery. More on that later.

Secondly, have a good look at what I underlined in bold and see exactly what it is being taught. That people "should" die rather than live because of their lack of God is not a lesson to be learned, it is an affront to everything moral and ethical of human rights and freedoms. It is a reason and a justification to commit atrocities and to turn a blind eye to the suffering of others who don't share your beliefs.

Which brings us back to the validity of your claim that "God is love". Surely, when we observe God showing us that he can behave so cruel, so vicious and petty, so completely selfish and unfeeling of others that it sickens and abhors us, we can understand that God is not love, at least, not all the time.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
philochristos
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 2:51:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 1:18:12 PM, smelisox wrote:
How is he three people at once? I never understood that.

You have to make a categorical distinction between a thing's being and its personhood. A being is just anything that exists. A person an instance of personal qualities had by a being.

There are some beings that are not person. For example, a rock is a being, but not a person.

Most beings that have personhood are only one person--cats, dogs, humans, etc.

God is a being that has three instances of personhood--Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each person has it's own first person awareness, so they are individual persons, but each person occupies (or possesses, if you like), the same being.

For you old testamenters, why did he put a big tree in Eden specifically where Adam and Eve were, with very enticing fruit that they can't eat? It's like putting a big red button there.

It depends on whether you take that story literally or not. If literally, then who knows? Maybe God actually intended the fall so that he could glorify himself in man's redemption.

If metaphorically, then the tree could represent any opportunity to sin and simply be making the point that man rebelled against God. It is hard to imagine any world worth living in that did not at least have the opportunity to sin. We'd each have to live on an island isolated from everybody else because as long as there's personal interaction, there is opportunity for sin.

If God is peace loving why did he burn Soddom to the ground?

God is not just peace and loving. He's also wrathful, holy, and just.

Explain how confession boxes are ok

I'm protestant, so I'll let the Catholics take that one.
"Not to know of what things one should demand demonstration, and of what one should not, argues want of education." ~Aristotle

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." ~Aristotle
Geogeer
Posts: 4,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 2:51:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 2:13:28 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 6/1/2015 1:32:02 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/1/2015 1:18:12 PM, smelisox wrote:
How is he three people at once? I never understood that.

Nobody really does, that is why it is a mystery. God is of a different nature than creation, and thus we cannot fully comprehend it.

What is even more difficult to comprehend is why anyone would devout themselves to a completely incomprehensible mystery?

See, someone has a question. You give an honest answer, and before the person has an opportunity to respond the atheists have an inborn need to smear meaninglessly. And people wonder why this forum doesn't operate properly...

Also a few traditional questions:

For you old testamenters, why did he put a big tree in Eden specifically where Adam and Eve were, with very enticing fruit that they can't eat? It's like putting a big red button there.

God gave us free will. Thus he must provide a means for us not to obey him - otherwise we don't have free will. That and it it allegorical in nature.

The error in logic there is that free will has been offered to man, which is the freedom to go out and use his own will to guide him. God, as the teacher of the man would only offer free will if He was satisfied that He had taught man everything He could teach. To make such an offer and then punish man for accepting it only serves to show the teacher is petty and selfish and had no intention of any valid or credible offers.

God has given us a conscience. One would assume that because Adam/Eve hadn't experienced sin that they did not suffer from concupiscence and thus had perfect consciences. As such their choice was a choice of perfect free will and one that affected all of humanity thereafter.

Using free will is not the same as disobeying God, they are mutually exclusive. Man can only disobey God if he uses his free will to commit atrocities to his fellow man, but if he uses his free will to lead a good life, he is obeying Gods will and should be rewarded.

I never said that they were mutually exclusive. What I said is that there had to be a means of disobedience to God. So we are in agreement.

That is logic in nature.

If God is peace loving why did he burn Soddom to the ground?

God is love. Soddom was a place that had abandoned love. Pure conjecture here, but perhaps any further soul that would have come from those people would have been damned and thus is was better that they die than be permitted to continue to live.

There are so many things wrong with that line of reasoning.

First of all, you contradict yourself when you say "God is love" right after telling us God is an incomprehensible mystery. More on that later.

The Trinity in basic form is easy to understand and meshes precisely with my statement that God is love. Love requires 3 things. A lover, the beloved, and the loving relationship between the two and that is what we have, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. To understand the fullness of God's nature is incomprehensible because the finite can never fully comprehend the infinite.

Secondly, have a good look at what I underlined in bold and see exactly what it is being taught. That people "should" die rather than live because of their lack of God is not a lesson to be learned, it is an affront to everything moral and ethical of human rights and freedoms.

All of us die because of God's will. He is our creator and life itself. Murder is wrong because we overrule God's will for the other person. God may end our lives at the moment he chooses because we exist for his purpose and not vise-versa.

It is a reason and a justification to commit atrocities and to turn a blind eye to the suffering of others who don't share your beliefs.

I have just stated that it is wrong to do that precisely because we are here to serve God. Christians saved widows and orphans when the rest of the world thought them crazy for doing so.

Which brings us back to the validity of your claim that "God is love". Surely, when we observe God showing us that he can behave so cruel, so vicious and petty, so completely selfish and unfeeling of others that it sickens and abhors us, we can understand that God is not love, at least, not all the time.

Strawman much?
joetheripper117
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 4:23:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 1:32:02 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/1/2015 1:18:12 PM, smelisox wrote:
How is he three people at once? I never understood that.

Nobody really does, that is why it is a mystery. God is of a different nature than creation, and thus we cannot fully comprehend it.

To me that seems rather like a cop-out answer. You could use that response to justify literally anything this God character does.

Also a few traditional questions:

For you old testamenters, why did he put a big tree in Eden specifically where Adam and Eve were, with very enticing fruit that they can't eat? It's like putting a big red button there.

God gave us free will. Thus he must provide a means for us not to obey him - otherwise we don't have free will. That and it it allegorical in nature.

I agree regarding your point that that story is allegorical, but have another question about it. How could this god character expect us to make a rational decision with our free will if he had not given us the knowledge of good and evil yet?

If God is peace loving why did he burn Soddom to the ground?

God is love. Soddom was a place that had abandoned love. Pure conjecture here, but perhaps any further soul that would have come from those people would have been damned and thus is was better that they die than be permitted to continue to live.

So the god character, a being with infinite love, displayed this love by essentially carpet bombing a bunch of civilians? Why wouldn't he have just appeared before them and told them how to better themselves, rather then slaughtering them and their innocent children?

Explain how confession boxes are ok

They are better than OK they are great!

That really isn't an answer to the question he asked. I think he wanted you to explain why they are necessary, and what purpose they serve.
"By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out."
-Richard Dawkins
"The onus is on you to say why; the onus is not on the rest of us to say why not."
-Richard Dawkins
philochristos
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 4:45:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 4:23:57 PM, joetheripper117 wrote:
At 6/1/2015 1:32:02 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/1/2015 1:18:12 PM, smelisox wrote:
How is he three people at once? I never understood that.

Nobody really does, that is why it is a mystery. God is of a different nature than creation, and thus we cannot fully comprehend it.

To me that seems rather like a cop-out answer. You could use that response to justify literally anything this God character does.

That's not a justification for anything God does. That's just an admission that one doesn't understand how God can be three people at once. How is that a cop-out? How does ANY admission of ignorance amount to a cop-out?
"Not to know of what things one should demand demonstration, and of what one should not, argues want of education." ~Aristotle

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." ~Aristotle
joetheripper117
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 4:51:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 4:45:59 PM, philochristos wrote:
At 6/1/2015 4:23:57 PM, joetheripper117 wrote:
At 6/1/2015 1:32:02 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/1/2015 1:18:12 PM, smelisox wrote:
How is he three people at once? I never understood that.

Nobody really does, that is why it is a mystery. God is of a different nature than creation, and thus we cannot fully comprehend it.

To me that seems rather like a cop-out answer. You could use that response to justify literally anything this God character does.

That's not a justification for anything God does. That's just an admission that one doesn't understand how God can be three people at once. How is that a cop-out? How does ANY admission of ignorance amount to a cop-out?

Its a cop out because it can be used to justify anything. Let's say god floods the earth and kills a bunch of people. You could make the claim "Oh, we just don't understand him" and it justifies the flood.
"By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out."
-Richard Dawkins
"The onus is on you to say why; the onus is not on the rest of us to say why not."
-Richard Dawkins
Geogeer
Posts: 4,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 4:54:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 4:23:57 PM, joetheripper117 wrote:
At 6/1/2015 1:32:02 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/1/2015 1:18:12 PM, smelisox wrote:
How is he three people at once? I never understood that.

Nobody really does, that is why it is a mystery. God is of a different nature than creation, and thus we cannot fully comprehend it.

To me that seems rather like a cop-out answer. You could use that response to justify literally anything this God character does.

To some degree that is true. However, we must also admit that our intellect is miniscule in comparison to God's. God knows EVERYTHING, whereas we have only a limited amount of knowledge on which to base our understanding.

We can understand aspects of God based on what he has revealed, but we will never fully understand God.

Also a few traditional questions:

For you old testamenters, why did he put a big tree in Eden specifically where Adam and Eve were, with very enticing fruit that they can't eat? It's like putting a big red button there.

God gave us free will. Thus he must provide a means for us not to obey him - otherwise we don't have free will. That and it it allegorical in nature.

I agree regarding your point that that story is allegorical, but have another question about it. How could this god character expect us to make a rational decision with our free will if he had not given us the knowledge of good and evil yet?

I kinda explained this in a different reply, but our conscience is given by God. Here our conscience is clouded by sin and ignorance based on our physical nature. Before the fall Adam/Eve would not have their consciences clouded by sin, however they still had ignorance as to the full effect of their action.

Thus there was a willful act of disobedience. However, it can be forgiven because they cannot fully understand their actions. Whereas when Satan and his cohort disobeyed, they could not be forgiven because their will and understanding was perfect because they are not flesh and spirit, but pure spirit.

If God is peace loving why did he burn Soddom to the ground?

God is love. Soddom was a place that had abandoned love. Pure conjecture here, but perhaps any further soul that would have come from those people would have been damned and thus is was better that they die than be permitted to continue to live.

So the god character, a being with infinite love, displayed this love by essentially carpet bombing a bunch of civilians? Why wouldn't he have just appeared before them and told them how to better themselves, rather then slaughtering them and their innocent children?

Wouldn't that be Jesus? Did everyone convert or was he violently murdered?

Explain how confession boxes are ok

They are better than OK they are great!

That really isn't an answer to the question he asked. I think he wanted you to explain why they are necessary, and what purpose they serve.

Well this is something that is nearly limited to Catholicism and Orthodoxy. I could write a lot, but it is a pretty vague question that would result in me spending a great deal of time and possibly not answering his question.

Since you have posed a clarification I will answer your questions. Confessionals exist in the Catholic and Orthodox religions because it is normatively necessary to confess your sins to a priest. Jesus gave apostles to forgive or retain sins. The apostles passed their authority onto their successors which we now call bishops. Every priest operates under the authority of his local bishop. Like when he says mass, the priest is acting in "persona Christi" and thus it is not the priest who forgives your sins, but Jesus.

A protestant would severely disagree with this an thus the greater issue is getting at the truth of Catholicism vs. Protestantism. Once you understand this confessional boxes will fall right into place.

Does that clarify things?
celestialtorahteacher
Posts: 1,369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 4:55:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The Gospel of Humanity reveals God's identity and God's Plan for human beings. It was written in religious language but the concepts are plain enough to follow.

Never pay the slightest attention to atheists whenever there's any discussion about God or spirituality. Atheists are here for public attention but since they all lack basic spiritual consciousness and can only give their opinions about spiritual phenomena as total outsiders to it, their opinions are so much hot air of blowhards, trolls stalking Christians on religious discussions, to get whatever public recognition they can using the Madison Avenue technique of non-stop advertising of themselves.
joetheripper117
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 4:58:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 4:55:29 PM, celestialtorahteacher wrote:
The Gospel of Humanity reveals God's identity and God's Plan for human beings. It was written in religious language but the concepts are plain enough to follow.

Please provide some evidence to support this claim.
Never pay the slightest attention to atheists whenever there's any discussion about God or spirituality. Atheists are here for public attention but since they all lack basic spiritual consciousness and can only give their opinions about spiritual phenomena as total outsiders to it, their opinions are so much hot air of blowhards, trolls stalking Christians on religious discussions, to get whatever public recognition they can using the Madison Avenue technique of non-stop advertising of themselves.

Considering that you are telling people to completely ignore us in these sorts of discussions, I assume that you will provide evidence that shows conclusively that we are wrong. Until you do this, there will always be reason to listen to the opposing side.
"By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out."
-Richard Dawkins
"The onus is on you to say why; the onus is not on the rest of us to say why not."
-Richard Dawkins
philochristos
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 5:02:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 4:51:26 PM, joetheripper117 wrote:
At 6/1/2015 4:45:59 PM, philochristos wrote:
At 6/1/2015 4:23:57 PM, joetheripper117 wrote:
At 6/1/2015 1:32:02 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/1/2015 1:18:12 PM, smelisox wrote:
How is he three people at once? I never understood that.

Nobody really does, that is why it is a mystery. God is of a different nature than creation, and thus we cannot fully comprehend it.

To me that seems rather like a cop-out answer. You could use that response to justify literally anything this God character does.

That's not a justification for anything God does. That's just an admission that one doesn't understand how God can be three people at once. How is that a cop-out? How does ANY admission of ignorance amount to a cop-out?

Its a cop out because it can be used to justify anything. Let's say god floods the earth and kills a bunch of people. You could make the claim "Oh, we just don't understand him" and it justifies the flood.

How does claiming not to know something or understand something justify anything? Geogeer didn't even offer it as a justification for anything. I don't see it as a cop out at all.
"Not to know of what things one should demand demonstration, and of what one should not, argues want of education." ~Aristotle

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." ~Aristotle
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,652
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 5:04:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 4:55:29 PM, celestialtorahteacher wrote:
The Gospel of Humanity reveals God's identity and God's Plan for human beings. It was written in religious language but the concepts are plain enough to follow.

Never pay the slightest attention to atheists whenever there's any discussion about God or spirituality. Atheists are here for public attention but since they all lack basic spiritual consciousness and can only give their opinions about spiritual phenomena as total outsiders to it, their opinions are so much hot air of blowhards, trolls stalking Christians on religious discussions, to get whatever public recognition they can using the Madison Avenue technique of non-stop advertising of themselves.

That's why this thread was created, so you could instruct us on how to become spiritual. If you were an honest believer, you would follow through rather than berating people.

http://www.debate.org...
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 5:05:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
So Jesus is god, The Holy Spirit is god, and the Father is god, and all of them are a full god, and Jesus is not the Father, and the Holy Ghost is not Jesus, despite that the three full gods are one god because they need each other to become a full god. What?

You either have three gods or you have three inferior and imperfect beings combining together that cannot be called a god.
Iredia
Posts: 1,608
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 5:14:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 1:18:12 PM, smelisox wrote:
How is he three people at once? I never understood that.

Think of it this way. We can take a personality, say Oprah and rightly say she's an actress, a mother a TV personality and a businesswoman. Each of these entails different skills and problems and (as should be especially clear in acting) personalities.

God is understood as a conscious creative force. God the Father is the very persona of this creative force, God the Holy Spirit is the very force of God which executes what the Father wants much like a body does what the mind wants. The both find grounding in God the Son, the avatar of God. Of course, the concept of an avatar isn't unique to Christianity. Jesus is simply the human manifestation of God much like Donald Blake is the human avatar of Thor.


Also a few traditional questions:

For you old testamenters, why did he put a big tree in Eden specifically where Adam and Eve were, with very enticing fruit that they can't eat? It's like putting a big red button there.

Nowhere is it stated the fruit is very enticing, it was made enticing to Eve after she was told of its one of its properties. That said, I can only assume that God did it to test Adam's obedience just as he tested his intelligence by bringing animals for him to identify.


If God is peace loving why did he burn Soddom to the ground?

They were wicked people and this is evidenced by how they wanted to maltreat Lot's guests.


Explain how confession boxes are ok

I'm not a Catholic.


Cheers!
Porn babes be distracting me. Dudes be stealing me stuff. I'm all about the cash from now. I'm not playing Jesus anymore.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 5:26:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 1:18:12 PM, smelisox wrote:
How is he three people at once? I never understood that.

We tend to understand things as they relate to stuff we already know. Which is why many people describe such a concept as a mystery. There is nothing we can fully relate to in this regard. As a side note I would like to point out that not everyone, or even every Christian denomination accepts the trinity as an equal triune of equal persons of equal power.

But there are some good analogies that make the concept easier to understand.

1. We ourselves are different people with different other people. I'm a different person around my parents. (I speak differently, act differently, ect..) Different person or role with my children as compared to my co-worker.

2. We are Body, Mind and Soul. Though you can point to my body and say that is Mhykiel (say when you see my dead body), you can also point to my comments, journals, code, artwork ect.. and say that is Mhykiel. So the trinity is not just of God, but mirrored in the triune nature of Man. The star of David is sometimes interpreted as being representative of this. @ interlocking triangles. One (father, son, spirit) other the interwoven and image of God, ie Man (body, Soul, and mind or spirit).

3. not as good of an example might be with programing classes. There are interface classes, abstract classes, and then normal classes. they all work together to form one object. Or they can be addressed separately (though not all can be instantiated).


Also a few traditional questions:

For you old testamenters, why did he put a big tree in Eden specifically where Adam and Eve were, with very enticing fruit that they can't eat? It's like putting a big red button there.

If god made Adam and Eve with all the thoughts and thinking patterns God wished for them, they would be robots. Doing what they were programmed to do. There is a benefit to experience that can't be received through lecture or per-programming. I think the fruit was eventually going to be available to Adam and Eve, but only till they matured in their own way of thinking and their own way of making choices.

But now we have to struggle as the whole of mankind matures.


If God is peace loving why did he burn Soddom to the ground?

It really isn't clear why God destroyed Soddom and Gomorrah.

Genesis 18:20: "Then the Lord said, "The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous 21. that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know."

And then later in chapter 19. the 2 angels sent to destroy the city remark to Lot "because we are going to destroy this place. The outcry to the LORD against its people is so great that he has sent us to destroy it."

The link to homosexuality is based on the interchange between Lot and the towns folk. The word "know" is sometimes used as a figure of speech for sex. And Lot does offer sex with his daughters as a way to sway the crowd. Only thing that is known is that the men of the town meant to do harm to the 2 guests.

And that the cities were destroyed because there was an outcry to the Lord against them. We really do not know all the charges laid against the people of Sodom.

What is also evident by Lot's actions and the actions of his family, is that they had bad judgement in moral matters. Despite Lot's express warning his wife turns around and dies. His daughters seduce Lot into having sex with them. Lot offers his daughter up to the crowd.. ect..

Now to answer your question. If God is peace loving why did he burn Soddom to the ground? I think because they were wicked, a bad influence on righteous people, and cruel and sinful in many ways to cause the suffering of God's people and/or this planet.


Explain how confession boxes are ok

the confession isn't kept for blackmail later on. If anything therapy is like confessional. It's not just O.K. but it is beneficial to have a none judging counselor to talk to about highly embarrassing or personal concerns.


Cheers!

McIntyre!
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,652
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 5:53:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 2:51:36 PM, Geogeer wrote:
God gave us free will.

God has given us a conscience.

Okay, for the sake of argument, I'll go along with that.

So, God gives us a conscience, he turns on our brains so that we may begin to think for ourselves, to become aware of ourselves and those around us, to reason, learn and understand so that we become what God intended.

Then, God gave us free will, the ability and capacity to use our brains, our conscience, our awareness to freely make decisions based on what we have learned and understand, to reach our full potential as individual humans and as a group.

So essentially, Adam and Eve did exactly what was expected of them after receiving the gifts of a conscience and of free will, they accepted and used it, only to be punished for it and as you say...

their choice was ... one that affected all of humanity thereafter.

That shows God to be petty and selfish. Although deep down he may have wanted Adam and Eve not to take his gifts of a conscience and free will, he shouldn't punish them because they did.

After all, they're not going to reject gifts from God, and He should have known that.

Using free will is not the same as disobeying God, they are mutually exclusive. Man can only disobey God if he uses his free will to commit atrocities to his fellow man, but if he uses his free will to lead a good life, he is obeying Gods will and should be rewarded.

I never said that they were mutually exclusive. What I said is that there had to be a means of disobedience to God. So we are in agreement.

But, there was no disobedience, Adam and Eve did exactly what they were expected to do with their new conscience and free will. God gave them an Earth told them to go forth and multiply. What would you expect they should have done?

That is logic in nature.

If God is peace loving why did he burn Soddom to the ground?

God is love. Soddom was a place that had abandoned love. Pure conjecture here, but perhaps any further soul that would have come from those people would have been damned and thus is was better that they die than be permitted to continue to live.

There are so many things wrong with that line of reasoning.

First of all, you contradict yourself when you say "God is love" right after telling us God is an incomprehensible mystery. More on that later.

The Trinity in basic form is easy to understand and meshes precisely with my statement that God is love. Love requires 3 things. A lover, the beloved, and the loving relationship between the two and that is what we have, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

That doesn't explain anything, you're just tossing words and phrases together that have no defined relation to one another.

To understand the fullness of God's nature is incomprehensible because the finite can never fully comprehend the infinite.

What does that mean? Define 'finite and infinite' and explain why one cannot comprehend the other?

Secondly, have a good look at what I underlined in bold and see exactly what it is being taught. That people "should" die rather than live because of their lack of God is not a lesson to be learned, it is an affront to everything moral and ethical of human rights and freedoms.

All of us die because of God's will.

Does that mean God killed over a quarter million people in a tsunami because it was His will to do so? How does that work?

He is our creator and life itself.

Do you have any evidence for that claim? Nature would show otherwise.

Murder is wrong because we overrule God's will for the other person.

I have no idea what that means.

God may end our lives at the moment he chooses because we exist for his purpose and not vise-versa.

So, suddenly God has a need for over a quarter million people to die in a tsunami?

Your explanations make no sense.

It is a reason and a justification to commit atrocities and to turn a blind eye to the suffering of others who don't share your beliefs.

I have just stated that it is wrong to do that precisely because we are here to serve God.

You can serve your God if you want, but that doesn't mean anyone else has to do the same.

Christians saved widows and orphans when the rest of the world thought them crazy for doing so.

Yeah, sure, whatever.

Which brings us back to the validity of your claim that "God is love". Surely, when we observe God showing us that he can behave so cruel, so vicious and petty, so completely selfish and unfeeling of others that it sickens and abhors us, we can understand that God is not love, at least, not all the time.

Strawman much?

No, it's an observation.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Serato
Posts: 743
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 5:55:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 1:18:12 PM, smelisox wrote:
How is he three people at once? I never understood that.

Just look at yourself for the answers, since you were made in His image. There are three parts to you as well. Firstly you're a spirit, and secondly a soul whom sits beneath silently to helm the pith of your ego's intellections. This is necessary to keep a safe distance from evil. Think of your spirit as the General, kept safely to the rear.
Also a few traditional questions:

For you old testamenters, why did he put a big tree in Eden specifically where Adam and Eve were, with very enticing fruit that they can't eat? It's like putting a big red button there.

The serpent told a lie. He said to bite from the tree of knowing, and you will not die. But as you can see, we know live, and then you die. So now we're born to this virtual world to live and learn lessons of death, and of free will which must include evil so we learn right from wrong, with the goal of uploading these lessons to your spirit so it may one day make these right choices with its own will. But for this to happen, it needs its three united. It was planned from the beginning. Had a bite been taken from the tree of life, we would have lived forever too soon, making poor choices and living eternal with its consequences. So what was done was necessary.

If God is peace loving why did he burn Soddom to the ground?
The serpent has ambitious desires to contaminate the human genetics. There are always attempts to thwart his efforts, but ever relentless he comes back to do more damage.

Explain how confession boxes are ok

Screw those confession boxes. Apologize to no man, but to God only.

Cheers!
Geogeer
Posts: 4,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 7:11:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 5:53:44 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 6/1/2015 2:51:36 PM, Geogeer wrote:
God gave us free will.

God has given us a conscience.

Okay, for the sake of argument, I'll go along with that.

So, God gives us a conscience, he turns on our brains so that we may begin to think for ourselves, to become aware of ourselves and those around us, to reason, learn and understand so that we become what God intended.

Then, God gave us free will, the ability and capacity to use our brains, our conscience, our awareness to freely make decisions based on what we have learned and understand, to reach our full potential as individual humans and as a group.

So essentially, Adam and Eve did exactly what was expected of them after receiving the gifts of a conscience and of free will, they accepted and used it, only to be punished for it and as you say...

That is rather deterministic as you assume that free will automatically entails abuse of the gift. It is like saying that if I give you a gun and train you to use it that you have no choice, but to misuse it. That becomes your choice.

They had knowledge that they were not to "eat the fruit" and their consciences were properly formed. Thus they knew to fully obey God. Anything beyond that was their choice.

their choice was ... one that affected all of humanity thereafter.

That shows God to be petty and selfish. Although deep down he may have wanted Adam and Eve not to take his gifts of a conscience and free will, he shouldn't punish them because they did.

God's will is perfect thus he always desires that which is good. His gifts of conscience and free will are intrinsic to humanity - we are made in God's image.

After all, they're not going to reject gifts from God, and He should have known that.

He did. Just like I will give my children the keys to my car when they get older. I expect them to follow the rules of the road all the time. Are they going to? Probably not. That does not mean that I forced them to speed by explaining the rules of the road and giving them my keys.

Using free will is not the same as disobeying God, they are mutually exclusive. Man can only disobey God if he uses his free will to commit atrocities to his fellow man, but if he uses his free will to lead a good life, he is obeying Gods will and should be rewarded.

I never said that they were mutually exclusive. What I said is that there had to be a means of disobedience to God. So we are in agreement.

But, there was no disobedience, Adam and Eve did exactly what they were expected to do with their new conscience and free will. God gave them an Earth told them to go forth and multiply. What would you expect they should have done?

A conscience tells reminds you of what you are not supposed to do. Thus they had to violate their consciences and thus your reasoning is in error. So mankind could not have gone forth and multiplied otherwise?

That is logic in nature.

If God is peace loving why did he burn Soddom to the ground?

God is love. Soddom was a place that had abandoned love. Pure conjecture here, but perhaps any further soul that would have come from those people would have been damned and thus is was better that they die than be permitted to continue to live.

There are so many things wrong with that line of reasoning.

First of all, you contradict yourself when you say "God is love" right after telling us God is an incomprehensible mystery. More on that later.

The Trinity in basic form is easy to understand and meshes precisely with my statement that God is love. Love requires 3 things. A lover, the beloved, and the loving relationship between the two and that is what we have, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

That doesn't explain anything, you're just tossing words and phrases together that have no defined relation to one another.

No critique is no refutation.

To understand the fullness of God's nature is incomprehensible because the finite can never fully comprehend the infinite.

What does that mean? Define 'finite and infinite' and explain why one cannot comprehend the other?

The finite can only understand other finite things, an infinite thing is beyond the finite. The finite can only define the infinite through a finite understanding.

Secondly, have a good look at what I underlined in bold and see exactly what it is being taught. That people "should" die rather than live because of their lack of God is not a lesson to be learned, it is an affront to everything moral and ethical of human rights and freedoms.

All of us die because of God's will.

Does that mean God killed over a quarter million people in a tsunami because it was His will to do so? How does that work?

In some manner yes. God is the author of life and it is up to him when life ends. As to why ask Job.

He is our creator and life itself.

Do you have any evidence for that claim? Nature would show otherwise.

Since we are discussing the attributes of God, one must begin with the premise that he explains. However, on this site whenever it gets difficult the atheists just revert to a prove it statement - case in point.

Murder is wrong because we overrule God's will for the other person.

I have no idea what that means.

Why is murder wrong? Think about it.

God may end our lives at the moment he chooses because we exist for his purpose and not vise-versa.

So, suddenly God has a need for over a quarter million people to die in a tsunami?

"Where were you when I laid the earth's foundations?"

Your explanations make no sense.

You're welcome.

It is a reason and a justification to commit atrocities and to turn a blind eye to the suffering of others who don't share your beliefs.

I have just stated that it is wrong to do that precisely because we are here to serve God.

You can serve your God if you want, but that doesn't mean anyone else has to do the same.

Non serviam - been said before mankind...

Christians saved widows and orphans when the rest of the world thought them crazy for doing so.

Yeah, sure, whatever.

Yup.

Which brings us back to the validity of your claim that "God is love". Surely, when we observe God showing us that he can behave so cruel, so vicious and petty, so completely selfish and unfeeling of others that it sickens and abhors us, we can understand that God is not love, at least, not all the time.

Strawman much?

No, it's an observation.

No it is your twisting of the facts.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,652
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 7:26:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 7:11:07 PM, Geogeer wrote:

That is rather deterministic as you assume that free will automatically entails abuse of the gift. It is like saying that if I give you a gun and train you to use it that you have no choice, but to misuse it. That becomes your choice.

Pay attention, I said the exact opposite, that free will DOES NOT automatically entail abuse of the gift. YOU are the one who is saying it DOES automatically entail abuse.

They had knowledge that they were not to "eat the fruit" and their consciences were properly formed. Thus they knew to fully obey God. Anything beyond that was their choice.

So, eating fruit was the huge crime of humanity? That's it?


their choice was ... one that affected all of humanity thereafter.

That shows God to be petty and selfish. Although deep down he may have wanted Adam and Eve not to take his gifts of a conscience and free will, he shouldn't punish them because they did.

God's will is perfect thus he always desires that which is good.

And, it's bad to eat fruit according to God's perfect will?

His gifts of conscience and free will are intrinsic to humanity - we are made in God's image.

So what? Do you have a point?

After all, they're not going to reject gifts from God, and He should have known that.

He did. Just like I will give my children the keys to my car when they get older. I expect them to follow the rules of the road all the time. Are they going to? Probably not. That does not mean that I forced them to speed by explaining the rules of the road and giving them my keys.

Does it mean you will severely punish them and their children forever more like God did? Seriously, do you not see the ridiculousness of God and how he handles things compared to us?

Using free will is not the same as disobeying God, they are mutually exclusive. Man can only disobey God if he uses his free will to commit atrocities to his fellow man, but if he uses his free will to lead a good life, he is obeying Gods will and should be rewarded.

I never said that they were mutually exclusive. What I said is that there had to be a means of disobedience to God. So we are in agreement.

But, there was no disobedience, Adam and Eve did exactly what they were expected to do with their new conscience and free will. God gave them an Earth told them to go forth and multiply. What would you expect they should have done?

A conscience tells reminds you of what you are not supposed to do. Thus they had to violate their consciences and thus your reasoning is in error. So mankind could not have gone forth and multiplied otherwise?

Again, because the ate some fruit? And, that's not ridiculous?

That is logic in nature.

If God is peace loving why did he burn Soddom to the ground?

God is love. Soddom was a place that had abandoned love. Pure conjecture here, but perhaps any further soul that would have come from those people would have been damned and thus is was better that they die than be permitted to continue to live.

There are so many things wrong with that line of reasoning.

First of all, you contradict yourself when you say "God is love" right after telling us God is an incomprehensible mystery. More on that later.

The Trinity in basic form is easy to understand and meshes precisely with my statement that God is love. Love requires 3 things. A lover, the beloved, and the loving relationship between the two and that is what we have, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

That doesn't explain anything, you're just tossing words and phrases together that have no defined relation to one another.

No critique is no refutation.

Critique of a word salad? Doesn't work that way.

To understand the fullness of God's nature is incomprehensible because the finite can never fully comprehend the infinite.

What does that mean? Define 'finite and infinite' and explain why one cannot comprehend the other?

The finite can only understand other finite things, an infinite thing is beyond the finite. The finite can only define the infinite through a finite understanding.

That's gibberish, you explained nothing.

Secondly, have a good look at what I underlined in bold and see exactly what it is being taught. That people "should" die rather than live because of their lack of God is not a lesson to be learned, it is an affront to everything moral and ethical of human rights and freedoms.

All of us die because of God's will.

Does that mean God killed over a quarter million people in a tsunami because it was His will to do so? How does that work?

In some manner yes. God is the author of life and it is up to him when life ends. As to why ask Job.

The story of Job shows God to be at some of his worst despicable behavior, he is a monster.

He is our creator and life itself.

Do you have any evidence for that claim? Nature would show otherwise.

Since we are discussing the attributes of God, one must begin with the premise that he explains.

No, God does not explain, he commands.

However, on this site whenever it gets difficult the atheists just revert to a prove it statement - case in point.

Murder is wrong because we overrule God's will for the other person.

I have no idea what that means.

Why is murder wrong? Think about it.

I understand why murder, I don't think you do.

God may end our lives at the moment he chooses because we exist for his purpose and not vise-versa.

So, suddenly God has a need for over a quarter million people to die in a tsunami?

"Where were you when I laid the earth's foundations?"

Your explanations make no sense.

You're welcome.

It is a reason and a justification to commit atrocities and to turn a blind eye to the suffering of others who don't share your beliefs.

I have just stated that it is wrong to do that precisely because we are here to serve God.

You can serve your God if you want, but that doesn't mean anyone else has to do the same.

Non serviam - been said before mankind...

Christians saved widows and orphans when the rest of the world thought them crazy for doing so.

Yeah, sure, whatever.

Yup.

Which brings us back to the validity of your claim that "God is love". Surely, when we observe God showing us that he can behave so cruel, so vicious and petty, so completely selfish and unfeeling of others that it sickens and abhors us, we can understand that God is not love, at least, not all the time.

Strawman much?

No, it's an observation.

No it is your twisting of the facts.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
joetheripper117
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 7:39:04 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 5:02:12 PM, philochristos wrote:
At 6/1/2015 4:51:26 PM, joetheripper117 wrote:
At 6/1/2015 4:45:59 PM, philochristos wrote:
At 6/1/2015 4:23:57 PM, joetheripper117 wrote:
At 6/1/2015 1:32:02 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/1/2015 1:18:12 PM, smelisox wrote:
How is he three people at once? I never understood that.

Nobody really does, that is why it is a mystery. God is of a different nature than creation, and thus we cannot fully comprehend it.

To me that seems rather like a cop-out answer. You could use that response to justify literally anything this God character does.

That's not a justification for anything God does. That's just an admission that one doesn't understand how God can be three people at once. How is that a cop-out? How does ANY admission of ignorance amount to a cop-out?

Its a cop out because it can be used to justify anything. Let's say god floods the earth and kills a bunch of people. You could make the claim "Oh, we just don't understand him" and it justifies the flood.

How does claiming not to know something or understand something justify anything? Geogeer didn't even offer it as a justification for anything. I don't see it as a cop out at all.

I see what you mean now. I would like to apologize for my misconception.
"By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out."
-Richard Dawkins
"The onus is on you to say why; the onus is not on the rest of us to say why not."
-Richard Dawkins
dee-em
Posts: 6,490
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 7:50:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 5:14:57 PM, Iredia wrote:
At 6/1/2015 1:18:12 PM, smelisox wrote:
How is he three people at once? I never understood that.

Think of it this way. We can take a personality, say Oprah and rightly say she's an actress, a mother a TV personality and a businesswoman. Each of these entails different skills and problems and (as should be especially clear in acting) personalities.

Poor analogy. When she is acting it is all Oprah. When she is mothering it is all Oprah. When she is on her TV show it is all Oprah. When she is running her businesses it is all Oprah. You are confusing roles she plays in different facets of her life with her core being. She is never anything but Oprah performing different tasks at different times.

Oprah has never called out "My Oprah, why hast though forsaken me?".

God is understood as a conscious creative force. God the Father is the very persona of this creative force, God the Holy Spirit is the very force of God which executes what the Father wants much like a body does what the mind wants. The both find grounding in God the Son, the avatar of God. Of course, the concept of an avatar isn't unique to Christianity. Jesus is simply the human manifestation of God much like Donald Blake is the human avatar of Thor.

This dogma has no relationship to your analogy. You are talking about three different components of one being each of which can simultaneously function independently of one another. All the criticisms levelled at such a concept still hold. Jesus is not just the human manifestation of God. The Bible tells us he was there in the beginning as the Word and he is there still long after his alleged sojourn on Earth.
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,326
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 7:57:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 1:18:12 PM, smelisox wrote:
How is he three people at once? I never understood that.

Moreover He is three people that act as one, meaning three individuals that move as a single unit. In terms of unity is where the oneness occurs.
Think in terms of concepts when trying to understanding spiritual things, usually they are simple but they have many layers and angles though all logical.
If you can take three strands of cord and "intertwine" them to create one link then it perfectly follows within logic that there can be three parts of God that work as one unit or one Being.
God has three parts that act as a single unit, each supported by the other all in unity generating more power and tension.

God the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit, three united aspects of God, three in one package. They are the Godhead intertwined so to speak as a single unit.

You will notice a commonality in a spiritual principle, that's called unity. Unity in spirit means precisely that, the Godhead is in perfect unity.
This principle runs across the board and follows down the line, when two or more people are in one accord they move as one force and when they are joined perfectly together God calls that a "body" (single, but many parts).
That is why division and disaccord is so prevalent, anything of value is always attacked. Unity is a powerful thing.

Also a few traditional questions:

For you old testamenters, why did he put a big tree in Eden specifically where Adam and Eve were, with very enticing fruit that they can't eat? It's like putting a big red button there.

Eh, pay more attention to what the Bible is more concerned with. It's the spiritual backdrop and principles that undergird every ounce of the Bible. Don't focus on the forefront too much or you will miss the message.

If God is peace loving why did he burn Soddom to the ground?

Read above. We reap what we sow, the OT is mans face looking in the mirror and God reflects mans image back to their own self, "live by the sword, die by the sword", "tooth for tooth". The contrast is the reflection of God in Jesus where the reflection is only God, the heart of God is and has always been that we abide in Him.
But if we live by the flesh we reap the results of the flesh. (James 1:13-16).

Explain how confession boxes are ok

Confession "boxes" is a Catholic ordeal. Move that aside and the principle remains consistent. Confess when you know what is wrong, when you've done something horrible to someone else and I'm sure all of us have apologized to someone at some point or another. It's simple, it doesn't mean find the local catholic church and sit in a box, it is a moral spiritual principle.
If you cheat on your spouse confess it, if you lied to someone confess it, if you cheated someone confess it ect ect. The principle behind confessing when you may have caused harm is righteous. Remember to look at the spiritual principle behind it.

Cheers!
Geogeer
Posts: 4,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/2/2015 11:02:39 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 7:26:54 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 6/1/2015 7:11:07 PM, Geogeer wrote:

That is rather deterministic as you assume that free will automatically entails abuse of the gift. It is like saying that if I give you a gun and train you to use it that you have no choice, but to misuse it. That becomes your choice.

Pay attention, I said the exact opposite, that free will DOES NOT automatically entail abuse of the gift. YOU are the one who is saying it DOES automatically entail abuse.

My comment:

God gave us free will. Thus he must provide a means for us not to obey him - otherwise we don't have free will.

I never said that our free will automatically entailed abuse. I said a means for us to abuse it must be present for it to truly be free will.

They had knowledge that they were not to "eat the fruit" and their consciences were properly formed. Thus they knew to fully obey God. Anything beyond that was their choice.

So, eating fruit was the huge crime of humanity? That's it?

Yup. Disobedience to God is what sin is.

their choice was ... one that affected all of humanity thereafter.

That shows God to be petty and selfish. Although deep down he may have wanted Adam and Eve not to take his gifts of a conscience and free will, he shouldn't punish them because they did.

God's will is perfect thus he always desires that which is good.

And, it's bad to eat fruit according to God's perfect will?

I already stated that it was probably allegorical in nature. However, if a fruit is poisonous it is normatively against nature for you to eat it. If it were poisonous to your soul, it would be against God's will for you to eat it.

His gifts of conscience and free will are intrinsic to humanity - we are made in God's image.

So what? Do you have a point?

Just refuting your statement: Although deep down he may have wanted Adam and Eve not to take his gifts of a conscience and free will, he shouldn't punish them because they did.

After all, they're not going to reject gifts from God, and He should have known that.

He did. Just like I will give my children the keys to my car when they get older. I expect them to follow the rules of the road all the time. Are they going to? Probably not. That does not mean that I forced them to speed by explaining the rules of the road and giving them my keys.

Does it mean you will severely punish them and their children forever more like God did? Seriously, do you not see the ridiculousness of God and how he handles things compared to us?

Breaking my commands will lose them access to my car. Breaking God's loses you access to heaven. God however came and re-opened the door for us all.

A conscience tells reminds you of what you are not supposed to do. Thus they had to violate their consciences and thus your reasoning is in error. So mankind could not have gone forth and multiplied otherwise?

Again, because the ate some fruit? And, that's not ridiculous?

Once again with the literalism - it is ridiculous that you choose to argue in such a small-minded manner.

The Trinity in basic form is easy to understand and meshes precisely with my statement that God is love. Love requires 3 things. A lover, the beloved, and the loving relationship between the two and that is what we have, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

That doesn't explain anything, you're just tossing words and phrases together that have no defined relation to one another.

No critique is no refutation.

Critique of a word salad? Doesn't work that way.

It was easy to read and clear in intent.

The finite can only understand other finite things, an infinite thing is beyond the finite. The finite can only define the infinite through a finite understanding.

That's gibberish, you explained nothing.

And yet I explained everything. Logic.

Secondly, have a good look at what I underlined in bold and see exactly what it is being taught. That people "should" die rather than live because of their lack of God is not a lesson to be learned, it is an affront to everything moral and ethical of human rights and freedoms.

All of us die because of God's will.

Does that mean God killed over a quarter million people in a tsunami because it was His will to do so? How does that work?

In some manner yes. God is the author of life and it is up to him when life ends. As to why ask Job.

The story of Job shows God to be at some of his worst despicable behavior, he is a monster.

Lol.

Since we are discussing the attributes of God, one must begin with the premise that he explains.

No, God does not explain, he commands.

Sorry, that was an auto-correct error. That should have read:

Since we are discussing the attributes of God, one must begin with the premise that he exists.

However, on this site whenever it gets difficult the atheists just revert to a prove it statement - case in point.

Murder is wrong because we overrule God's will for the other person.

I have no idea what that means.

Why is murder wrong? Think about it.

I understand why murder, I don't think you do.

I'd love to hear it.
smelisox
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/2/2015 11:19:03 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/2/2015 11:02:39 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/1/2015 7:26:54 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 6/1/2015 7:11:07 PM, Geogeer wrote:

That is rather deterministic as you assume that free will automatically entails abuse of the gift. It is like saying that if I give you a gun and train you to use it that you have no choice, but to misuse it. That becomes your choice.

Pay attention, I said the exact opposite, that free will DOES NOT automatically entail abuse of the gift. YOU are the one who is saying it DOES automatically entail abuse.

My comment:

God gave us free will. Thus he must provide a means for us not to obey him - otherwise we don't have free will.

I never said that our free will automatically entailed abuse. I said a means for us to abuse it must be present for it to truly be free will.

They had knowledge that they were not to "eat the fruit" and their consciences were properly formed. Thus they knew to fully obey God. Anything beyond that was their choice.

So, eating fruit was the huge crime of humanity? That's it?

Yup. Disobedience to God is what sin is.

their choice was ... one that affected all of humanity thereafter.

That shows God to be petty and selfish. Although deep down he may have wanted Adam and Eve not to take his gifts of a conscience and free will, he shouldn't punish them because they did.

God's will is perfect thus he always desires that which is good.

And, it's bad to eat fruit according to God's perfect will?

I already stated that it was probably allegorical in nature. However, if a fruit is poisonous it is normatively against nature for you to eat it. If it were poisonous to your soul, it would be against God's will for you to eat it.

His gifts of conscience and free will are intrinsic to humanity - we are made in God's image.

So what? Do you have a point?

Just refuting your statement: Although deep down he may have wanted Adam and Eve not to take his gifts of a conscience and free will, he shouldn't punish them because they did.

After all, they're not going to reject gifts from God, and He should have known that.

He did. Just like I will give my children the keys to my car when they get older. I expect them to follow the rules of the road all the time. Are they going to? Probably not. That does not mean that I forced them to speed by explaining the rules of the road and giving them my keys.

Does it mean you will severely punish them and their children forever more like God did? Seriously, do you not see the ridiculousness of God and how he handles things compared to us?

Breaking my commands will lose them access to my car. Breaking God's loses you access to heaven. God however came and re-opened the door for us all.


A conscience tells reminds you of what you are not supposed to do. Thus they had to violate their consciences and thus your reasoning is in error. So mankind could not have gone forth and multiplied otherwise?

Again, because the ate some fruit? And, that's not ridiculous?

Once again with the literalism - it is ridiculous that you choose to argue in such a small-minded manner.


The Trinity in basic form is easy to understand and meshes precisely with my statement that God is love. Love requires 3 things. A lover, the beloved, and the loving relationship between the two and that is what we have, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

That doesn't explain anything, you're just tossing words and phrases together that have no defined relation to one another.

No critique is no refutation.

Critique of a word salad? Doesn't work that way.

It was easy to read and clear in intent.


The finite can only understand other finite things, an infinite thing is beyond the finite. The finite can only define the infinite through a finite understanding.

That's gibberish, you explained nothing.

And yet I explained everything. Logic.

Secondly, have a good look at what I underlined in bold and see exactly what it is being taught. That people "should" die rather than live because of their lack of God is not a lesson to be learned, it is an affront to everything moral and ethical of human rights and freedoms.

All of us die because of God's will.

Does that mean God killed over a quarter million people in a tsunami because it was His will to do so? How does that work?

In some manner yes. God is the author of life and it is up to him when life ends. As to why ask Job.

The story of Job shows God to be at some of his worst despicable behavior, he is a monster.

Lol.

Since we are discussing the attributes of God, one must begin with the premise that he explains.

No, God does not explain, he commands.

Sorry, that was an auto-correct error. That should have read:

Since we are discussing the attributes of God, one must begin with the premise that he exists.

However, on this site whenever it gets difficult the atheists just revert to a prove it statement - case in point.

Murder is wrong because we overrule God's will for the other person.

I have no idea what that means.

Why is murder wrong? Think about it.

I understand why murder, I don't think you do.

I'd love to hear it.

I am basically Satan though. I've broken every commandment several times. Will I burn in hell?
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,652
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/2/2015 11:21:25 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/2/2015 11:02:39 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/1/2015 7:26:54 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 6/1/2015 7:11:07 PM, Geogeer wrote:

That is rather deterministic as you assume that free will automatically entails abuse of the gift. It is like saying that if I give you a gun and train you to use it that you have no choice, but to misuse it. That becomes your choice.

Pay attention, I said the exact opposite, that free will DOES NOT automatically entail abuse of the gift. YOU are the one who is saying it DOES automatically entail abuse.

My comment:

God gave us free will. Thus he must provide a means for us not to obey him - otherwise we don't have free will.

I never said that our free will automatically entailed abuse. I said a means for us to abuse it must be present for it to truly be free will.

And, that "means" is what, exactly?

They had knowledge that they were not to "eat the fruit" and their consciences were properly formed. Thus they knew to fully obey God. Anything beyond that was their choice.

So, eating fruit was the huge crime of humanity? That's it?

Yup. Disobedience to God is what sin is.

Eating fruit is a sin? And, it caused the downfall of man? LOL.

their choice was ... one that affected all of humanity thereafter.

That shows God to be petty and selfish. Although deep down he may have wanted Adam and Eve not to take his gifts of a conscience and free will, he shouldn't punish them because they did.

God's will is perfect thus he always desires that which is good.

And, it's bad to eat fruit according to God's perfect will?

I already stated that it was probably allegorical in nature. However, if a fruit is poisonous it is normatively against nature for you to eat it.

LOL. Wow, you really are grasping here.

If it were poisonous to your soul, it would be against God's will for you to eat it.

Sorry, souls have never been shown to exist, your point is moot.

His gifts of conscience and free will are intrinsic to humanity - we are made in God's image.

So what? Do you have a point?

Just refuting your statement: Although deep down he may have wanted Adam and Eve not to take his gifts of a conscience and free will, he shouldn't punish them because they did.

It didn't refute the statement at all, it contradicts the statement.

After all, they're not going to reject gifts from God, and He should have known that.

He did. Just like I will give my children the keys to my car when they get older. I expect them to follow the rules of the road all the time. Are they going to? Probably not. That does not mean that I forced them to speed by explaining the rules of the road and giving them my keys.

Does it mean you will severely punish them and their children forever more like God did? Seriously, do you not see the ridiculousness of God and how he handles things compared to us?

Breaking my commands will lose them access to my car. Breaking God's loses you access to heaven.

And, that's somehow the same thing? LOL.

God however came and re-opened the door for us all.

So, after God had a nervous breakdown and acted like a psychotic despot, he calmed down and gave us another chance, even though He is the one completely at fault?


A conscience tells reminds you of what you are not supposed to do. Thus they had to violate their consciences and thus your reasoning is in error. So mankind could not have gone forth and multiplied otherwise?

Again, because the ate some fruit? And, that's not ridiculous?

Once again with the literalism - it is ridiculous that you choose to argue in such a small-minded manner.

It's your fairy tale and it is very small-minded, yet you somehow are trying to defend it.


The Trinity in basic form is easy to understand and meshes precisely with my statement that God is love. Love requires 3 things. A lover, the beloved, and the loving relationship between the two and that is what we have, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

That doesn't explain anything, you're just tossing words and phrases together that have no defined relation to one another.

No critique is no refutation.

Critique of a word salad? Doesn't work that way.

It was easy to read and clear in intent.

It was gibberish.


The finite can only understand other finite things, an infinite thing is beyond the finite. The finite can only define the infinite through a finite understanding.

That's gibberish, you explained nothing.

And yet I explained everything. Logic.

You did no such thing, it's gibberish.

Secondly, have a good look at what I underlined in bold and see exactly what it is being taught. That people "should" die rather than live because of their lack of God is not a lesson to be learned, it is an affront to everything moral and ethical of human rights and freedoms.

All of us die because of God's will.

Does that mean God killed over a quarter million people in a tsunami because it was His will to do so? How does that work?

In some manner yes. God is the author of life and it is up to him when life ends. As to why ask Job.

The story of Job shows God to be at some of his worst despicable behavior, he is a monster.

Lol.

Since we are discussing the attributes of God, one must begin with the premise that he explains.

No, God does not explain, he commands.

Sorry, that was an auto-correct error. That should have read:

Since we are discussing the attributes of God, one must begin with the premise that he exists.

However, on this site whenever it gets difficult the atheists just revert to a prove it statement - case in point.

Murder is wrong because we overrule God's will for the other person.

I have no idea what that means.

Why is murder wrong? Think about it.

I understand why murder, I don't think you do.

I'd love to hear it.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Geogeer
Posts: 4,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/2/2015 11:28:49 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/2/2015 11:19:03 AM, smelisox wrote:

I am basically Satan though.

Lol.

I've broken every commandment several times. Will I burn in hell?

Only God can judge your soul. That being said, from what we know, hell is the destination for all souls who have offended God without repentance.