Author Topic: Speaking in GoDs Language  (Read 16996 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline KingofBashan

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 28
  • Darwins +1/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #435 on: March 03, 2012, 04:38:14 PM »
So you are saying god makes food taste good or bad? Why make foods that are bad for us taste good? And why make foods that are good for us taste bad? Why does everyone have different sensations for what tastes good and bad?

Why doesn't god change the laws of physics to keep good people from dying?

Yes. God is the creator and upholder of everything. That food tastes good at all is by his design. I don't have any idea why he makes some things taste good and other things taste bad. The Bible doesn't say so I assume it is unimportant.

The Bible teaches there are no good people. We have all inherited sin and death. The only person who didn't chose to die for those who would believe on him.

Offline Emily

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5663
  • Darwins +49/-0
  • Gender: Female
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #436 on: March 03, 2012, 04:48:36 PM »
The Bible teaches there are no good people. We have all inherited sin and death. The only person who didn't chose to die for those who would believe on him.

And why should we suffer for something our ancestors did?
"Great moments are born from great opportunities." Herb Brooks

I edit a lot of my posts. The reason being it to add content or to correct grammar/wording. All edits to remove wording get a strike through through the wording.

Offline KingofBashan

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 28
  • Darwins +1/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #437 on: March 03, 2012, 05:20:38 PM »
The Bible teaches there are no good people. We have all inherited sin and death. The only person who didn't chose to die for those who would believe on him.

And why should we suffer for something our ancestors did?

There are at least two answers to that question. The first is that our ancestors are good representatives for us (what that means is that if we were in their shoes we would have done the same thing they did). The second is that it isn't our decision to make - God is the final judge and if he chooses to condemn the race for the actions of their parents, there is no higher we authority we can appeal to overturn the decision.

In reference to this second answer, this is the answer in my experience we have the hardest time accepting.  The first answer is enough to prove that God wasn't acting arbitrarily. In addition to this, he has proven his justice and his good intentions by providing a solution to our sufferings - in fact, he has gone as far as he possibly can to prove it, which is that he, the creator, humiliated himself by taking on human flesh and suffered the penalty of his own law, ie, he suffered death.

So basically what the bible teaches is this. Our parents sinned, and we have to suffer for it, but this fair because if we were in their shoes we would have done the same thing. God proves his goodness by suffering the consequences of sin for those who trust him. This effectively means that Jesus suffered for the sins of others so that they would have hope that there sufferings will someday cease, and that they would have hope of righteousness.

So if we really want to boil things down, it boils down like this. Humanity's greatest need is righteousness. God provides it for us through Jesus Christ. Those who don't believe prove they don't see righteousness as their greatest need and so God doesn't give it to them - they will suffer the consequences of their sin. Those who do believe prove they see righteousness as their greatest need and God gives it to them as a free gift - the sufferings that they experience are nothing compared to the hope they have for the future, and are therefore comforted greatly.


Offline Samothec

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
  • Darwins +49/-2
  • Gender: Male
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #438 on: March 03, 2012, 05:41:53 PM »
... he, the creator, humiliated himself by taking on human flesh and suffered the penalty of his own law, ie, he suffered death.

Humiliated by taking on human form? So people were made disgraceful from the start.

Quote
The first is that our ancestors are good representatives for us (what that means is that if we were in their shoes we would have done the same thing they did). ...  The first answer is enough to prove that God wasn't acting arbitrarily.

Well, considering god stacked the deck by tricking two innocents into eating an apple by sending a talking snake into the garden to convince them to eat the apple. I agree he wasn't being arbitrary; he was being cruel and monstrous.

Quote
In addition to this, he has proven his justice and his good intentions by providing a solution to our sufferings - in fact, he has gone as far as he possibly can to prove it, which is that ...

But that's not true - we still suffer in this world. It was not made into a world-wide garden. As for suffering in the next world, well, you will need to prove that next world exists. Note that I said prove, not quote the bible.
Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding. - Martin Luther

Offline JeffPT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1992
  • Darwins +194/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a lead farmer mutha fucka
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #439 on: March 03, 2012, 05:45:24 PM »
The real world evidence that makes it stand out is the witness of the Bible.

This is a poor answer due to the fact that there are lots of religions with holy books, and all followers of those religions make equal claims about them.  So I ask you again, what makes the Christian religious position stand out as true versus the others?  I am looking for some sort of real world evidence here, because really, the bible is just a book with claims in it that may or may not be true.  Do you admit that is the case? 
Whenever events that are purported to occur in our best interest are as numerous as the events that will just as soon kill us, then intent is hard, if not impossible to assert. NDT

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6381
  • Darwins +817/-5
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #440 on: March 03, 2012, 05:49:17 PM »

The Bible teaches there are no good people. We have all inherited sin and death. The only person who didn't chose to die for those who would believe on him.

If there are no good people (not even newborn babies?) then god made us badly.
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline GodlessHeathen

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 274
  • Darwins +9/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Absence of evidence is not evidence of existence.
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #441 on: March 03, 2012, 06:06:55 PM »

And why should we suffer for something our ancestors did?

There are at least two answers to that question. The first is that our ancestors are good representatives for us (what that means is that if we were in their shoes we would have done the same thing they did).

This of course assumes (and it is a very big assumption) that God even exists at all, much less the Judeo-Christian god specifically. This explanation, of course, assumes that God is omnipotent and knows the future. The problem with that is, if he knew that we would do the same thing if we were in their shoes, he also knew that the first man and woman would sin in the first place.

Christian doctrine has 90% of the human race going to Hell, essentially doomed before their birth, a situation the proposed Judeo-Christian God could have stopped before it started yet chose not to. What that means is he must have thought it was "good" to create billions of humans, knowing that they would be automatically consigned to suffer if he did so. Surely you can see how that is problematic from a philosophical and even a common sense standpoint.

The second is that it isn't our decision to make - God is the final judge and if he chooses to condemn the race for the actions of their parents, there is no higher we authority we can appeal to overturn the decision. 

But if said God created us in his own image, the same things that are morally repugnant to us should be morally repugnant to him as well. How many civilized societies do you know of that punish children for the actions of their parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, etc.? Something about the concept seems to go against human nature itself.

In reference to this second answer, this is the answer in my experience we have the hardest time accepting.  The first answer is enough to prove that God wasn't acting arbitrarily. In addition to this, he has proven his justice and his good intentions by providing a solution to our sufferings - in fact, he has gone as far as he possibly can to prove it, which is that he, the creator, humiliated himself by taking on human flesh and suffered the penalty of his own law, ie, he suffered death.

The Son who Christianity has as being "crucified before the foundation of the world" still does not soften the idea of a god who knew exactly how every event in history would pan out before it happened and then went ahead and allow it all by creating mankind anyway. The only conclusion one can reach from that is that God actually wanted billions of humans to go to Hell.

If God knew yet could not choose any other course of action, then said God does not have free will and therefore is not omnipotent. If God could choose and did not, then said God is not all-merciful and all-loving.

So basically what the bible teaches is this. Our parents sinned, and we have to suffer for it, but this fair because if we were in their shoes we would have done the same thing. God proves his goodness by suffering the consequences of sin for those who trust him. This effectively means that Jesus suffered for the sins of others so that they would have hope that there sufferings will someday cease, and that they would have hope of righteousness. 

Again how is it fair to consign someone to punishment based on what they "would have done." There is just no way around the conundrum here. Even when I was a Christian, I pushed this issue under the rug and tried not to think about it. Any way you look at it, you have a God who could have prevented the fall of mankind by not creating mankind in the first place yet went ahead and created mankind, thereby proving that it was his will, that he thought that it was "good" for 90% of the human race to be consigned to Hell. No Bandaid one might put on it can change that, whether it be the free will Bandaid, the Savior Bandaid, or any other doctrinal Bandaid one can come up with.

So if we really want to boil things down, it boils down like this. Humanity's greatest need is righteousness. God provides it for us through Jesus Christ. Those who don't believe prove they don't see righteousness as their greatest need and so God doesn't give it to them - they will suffer the consequences of their sin. Those who do believe prove they see righteousness as their greatest need and God gives it to them as a free gift - the sufferings that they experience are nothing compared to the hope they have for the future, and are therefore comforted greatly.

What it boils down to is that our very birth immediately consigns most of us to the most unimaginable torture... and to suffer it forever and ever and ever.

Now as far as the Savior alternative goes, Christian tradition has Jesus suffering for what, a little less than 48 hours as a substitute for eternal punishment? And if we reject Jesus, we still suffer punishment for the crimes he has supposedly already paid for (which is double jeopardy)? And the punishment lasts forever for only a short lifetime of sins? That isn't fair, because the punishment doesn't fit the crime.
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence" (Christopher Hitchens).

Offline KingofBashan

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 28
  • Darwins +1/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #442 on: March 03, 2012, 06:13:38 PM »
Humiliated by taking on human form? So people were made disgraceful from the start.

No. I am refering to the intrinsic distance between the divine and the created.

Well, considering god stacked the deck by tricking two innocents into eating an apple by sending a talking snake into the garden to convince them to eat the apple. I agree he wasn't being arbitrary; he was being cruel and monstrous.

He is good. He already commanded them not to eat of it and he gave them a heads up of the consequences. Their sin is theirs. It isn't the snake's and it isn't God's.

But that's not true - we still suffer in this world. It was not made into a world-wide garden. As for suffering in the next world, well, you will need to prove that next world exists. Note that I said prove, not quote the bible.

We still suffer. I didn't say we don't. I said for those who believe there are two comforts: 1. The suffering is shared by Christ. 2. The suffering is temporary.

Offline KingofBashan

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 28
  • Darwins +1/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #443 on: March 03, 2012, 06:15:12 PM »
The real world evidence that makes it stand out is the witness of the Bible.

This is a poor answer due to the fact that there are lots of religions with holy books, and all followers of those religions make equal claims about them.  So I ask you again, what makes the Christian religious position stand out as true versus the others?  I am looking for some sort of real world evidence here, because really, the bible is just a book with claims in it that may or may not be true.  Do you admit that is the case?

No that is not the case. Truth is objective. The Bible claims to be the word of God. If you choose not to accept it at face value then no matter how many arguments I would give, you have already made your choice.

Offline The Gawd

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 883
  • Darwins +78/-5
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #444 on: March 03, 2012, 06:18:34 PM »

There are at least two answers to that question. The first is that our ancestors are good representatives for us (what that means is that if we were in their shoes we would have done the same thing they did).

Many others have and will respond to the rest of the post which I have snipped, but this particular point sticks out.

Are Adam and Eve not also ancestors of Jesus, thus making him guilty in the same manner we are?
« Last Edit: March 03, 2012, 06:22:34 PM by The Gawd »

Offline KingofBashan

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 28
  • Darwins +1/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #445 on: March 03, 2012, 06:20:25 PM »

The Bible teaches there are no good people. We have all inherited sin and death. The only person who didn't chose to die for those who would believe on him.

If there are no good people (not even newborn babies?) then god made us badly.

God made us upright, but we betrayed him and became bad. Even so, God is the creator and we are the creature - this is the premise the Bible presents.

So what things is a creature not dependent on his creator for?
Nothing, a creature is dependent on his creator for everything.
Even righteousness?
Yes. Even righteousness.
So it is God's fault I am unrighteous?
No, because God will give righteousness to all who ask him.
So, according to the Bible,  I am guilty for not believing that he will give me righteousness, or for not wanting it.
Yes.

Offline KingofBashan

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 28
  • Darwins +1/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #446 on: March 03, 2012, 06:26:43 PM »

There are at least two answers to that question. The first is that our ancestors are good representatives for us (what that means is that if we were in their shoes we would have done the same thing they did).

Many others have and will respond to the rest of the post which I have snipped, but this particular point sticks out.

Are Adam and Eve not also ancestors of Jesus, thus guilty in the same manner we are?

Jesus is different in two ways: First, he is the Son of God, ie, he does not descend from Adam. He is the new Adam. This means he is a new representative for humanity. Second, he has two natures, he is both human and divine, and he was given the Spirit without measure. This means he is perfectly righteous. He is innocent, he has earned God's favor by living a perfect life, and God accepts him. Those who believe on him have the guilt they inherited from Adam removed and the innocence of Christ given to them as a free gift.

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6381
  • Darwins +817/-5
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #447 on: March 03, 2012, 06:33:09 PM »

The Bible teaches there are no good people. We have all inherited sin and death. The only person who didn't chose to die for those who would believe on him.

If there are no good people (not even newborn babies?) then god made us badly.

God made us upright, but we betrayed him and became bad. Even so, God is the creator and we are the creature - this is the premise the Bible presents.

So what things is a creature not dependent on his creator for?
Nothing, a creature is dependent on his creator for everything.
Even righteousness?
Yes. Even righteousness.
So it is God's fault I am unrighteous?
No, because God will give righteousness to all who ask him.
So, according to the Bible,  I am guilty for not believing that he will give me righteousness, or for not wanting it.
Yes.
How does something "made perfect" become bad? If you somehow manage to make a perfect diamond, will it develop flaws? No, because that would mean it was not perfect. Perfect means flawless. If god is perfect, ie flawless, then he could certainly make perfect, flawless people who would not become bad. Why didn't he? Would have saved all that suffering.

Since god made people with the inherent capacity to become bad, like the "perfect" diamond with an invisible flaw that suddenly appears, he wanted all that suffering. And that means he is not good, at least not good in any way that humans deem good. And we can't keep changing the meaning of "good" to match whatever we see in reality, because it was supposedly created by god. (Dictators who kill lots of people might think they are doing good. Just because someone is powerful does not make them right.) How can it be any other way?
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline Samothec

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
  • Darwins +49/-2
  • Gender: Male
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #448 on: March 03, 2012, 06:36:35 PM »
Well, considering god stacked the deck by tricking two innocents into eating an apple by sending a talking snake into the garden to convince them to eat the apple. I agree he wasn't being arbitrary; he was being cruel and monstrous.
He is good. He already commanded them not to eat of it and he gave them a heads up of the consequences. Their sin is theirs. It isn't the snake's and it isn't God's.

That is a lie - the sin was manufactured by god. They were innocent; they did not understand good and evil. Along comes a snake that tells them it is okay to eat the apple now. Since they understand what death is they understand things can change. Plus, how does the snake talk unless god made it that way? Plus, they did not actually die when they ate the apple. If god had told the truth Eve would have died and Adam never would have - seeing Eve's body would have shown him the snake lied. But she did not die showing that the snake spoke the truth and god either lied or the apple changed into being non-poisonous. This is basic logic - how do you not understand this?

Or it is not literal - only allegory - but that again means there is no "original sin".
Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding. - Martin Luther

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6381
  • Darwins +817/-5
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #449 on: March 03, 2012, 06:39:48 PM »

There are at least two answers to that question. The first is that our ancestors are good representatives for us (what that means is that if we were in their shoes we would have done the same thing they did).

Many others have and will respond to the rest of the post which I have snipped, but this particular point sticks out.

Are Adam and Eve not also ancestors of Jesus, thus guilty in the same manner we are?

Jesus is different in two ways: First, he is the Son of God, ie, he does not descend from Adam. He is the new Adam. This means he is a new representative for humanity. Second, he has two natures, he is both human and divine, and he was given the Spirit without measure. This means he is perfectly righteous. He is innocent, he has earned God's favor by living a perfect life, and God accepts him. Those who believe on him have the guilt they inherited from Adam removed and the innocence of Christ given to them as a free gift.

New Adam? Are humans all descended from Jesus, then? Seems like it would have been easier if god just wiped everyone off the planet and started over fresh, with new, sin-free people. Then we would not have that original sin problem held over from A & E.

Wait just a minute, didn't god already do that? With the flood? So how did all the bad people come back again? Damn, that nasty ol' sin keeps popping up like fungus in a locker room.... :P
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline The Gawd

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 883
  • Darwins +78/-5
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #450 on: March 03, 2012, 06:39:54 PM »
Jesus is different in two ways: First, he is the Son of God, ie, he does not descend from Adam. He is the new Adam. This means he is a new representative for humanity. Second, he has two natures, he is both human and divine, and he was given the Spirit without measure. This means he is perfectly righteous. He is innocent, he has earned God's favor by living a perfect life, and God accepts him. Those who believe on him have the guilt they inherited from Adam removed and the innocence of Christ given to them as a free gift.

This is incorrect. (accepting the story of A&E for the sake of argument) Jesus IS a descendant of Adam AND Eve. He, in theory, is NOT a descendant of Joseph. But ALL people are supposedly descendants of Adam and Eve including Jesus, the same way I am a descendant of my great great grand parents on either side (whether one of my parents is actually a person doesnt deny that I come from both their lines).

Also, as it was taught to me, the ONLY way Jesus is even an acceptible candidate to be tortured and killed by his Father/Self for us is that he is 100% human and had the same tribulations as we do. If youre arguing that he is not one of us then that nullifies him torturing himself and "dying" (for a couple days) for us.

The ONLY two options appear to be 1) Jesus was born guilty like people are due to his ancestry or 2) Jesus was not born guilty of being a descendant of men (humans) and thus isnt an acceptible candidate for what you claim he is.

Which is it?

Offline KingofBashan

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 28
  • Darwins +1/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #451 on: March 03, 2012, 06:40:52 PM »
What that means is he must have thought it was "good" to create billions of humans, knowing that they would be automatically consigned to suffer if he did so. Surely you can see how that is problematic from a philosophical and even a common sense standpoint.

Of course I do. But, assuming God exists, what can I do about it? God is God, not me. Even if I don't like it I can't change anything. And from the way I see it those billions are consigned to suffer because they refuse to trust in a God who is provided a way to salvation. 

But if said God created us in his own image, the same things that are morally repugnant to us should be morally repugnant to him as well. How many civilized societies do you know of that punish children for the actions of their parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, etc.? Something about the concept seems to go against human nature itself.

Well, first God isn't punishing us for something our grandparents did. He is punishing us for something we have gone along with. What society doesn't admit that accomplices are guilty? Second, being made in God's image doesn't mean that we are God. It means that we can relate to him.

The Son who Christianity has as being "crucified before the foundation of the world" still does not soften the idea of a god who knew exactly how every event in history would pan out before it happened and then went ahead and allow it all by creating mankind anyway. The only conclusion one can reach from that is that God actually wanted billions of humans to go to Hell.

If God knew yet could not choose any other course of action, then said God does not have free will and therefore is not omnipotent. If God could choose and did not, then said God is not all-merciful and all-loving.

How can God be God and not know what is going to happen? God is not all loving. The Bible never claims he is. God is all powerful but this doesn't mean that he can do every crazy whim imaginable. For instance he cannot anihilate himself. It means he has all authority and he will exercise it on behalf of those who call out to him.

Again how is it fair to consign someone to punishment based on what they "would have done." There is just no way around the conundrum here. Even when I was a Christian, I pushed this issue under the rug and tried not to think about it. Any way you look at it, you have a God who could have prevented the fall of mankind by not creating mankind in the first place yet went ahead and created mankind, thereby proving that it was his will, that he thought that it was "good" for 90% of the human race to be consigned to Hell. No Bandaid one might put on it can change that, whether it be the free will Bandaid, the Savior Bandaid, or any other doctrinal Bandaid one can come up with.

I think I have already addressed these issues...

To elaborate on the "would have done"... Its like this. What is more efficient? To create two human beings that represent the best of humanity and give them a command (a really simple one at that). Or to create every human being in their own garden of eden again and again when you already know what they are going to do. You have to understand that Adam and Eve had every possible advantage and they still chose to be unfaithful to God. It is not unfair for us to confess that we would have done the same thing.

Also, ask yourself this question, do you believe in God? If not, then the Bible is right, you would have done the same thing.

What it boils down to is that our very birth immediately consigns most of us to the most unimaginable torture... and to suffer it forever and ever and ever.

Now as far as the Savior alternative goes, Christian tradition has Jesus suffering for what, a little less than 48 hours as a substitute for eternal punishment? And if we reject Jesus, we still suffer punishment for the crimes he has supposedly already paid for (which is double jeopardy)? And the punishment lasts forever for only a short lifetime of sins? That isn't fair, because the punishment doesn't fit the crime.

You remind me of a friend on IGI, he goes by the name FormerBeliever over there. You should hook up sometime.

Jesus did not pay for the crimes of everyone. Only those who will believe on him.  His sufferings were not only physical but spiritual - he bore God's wrath in full. Jesud did not pay for the sins of those who go to hell because you are right that would be unjust - they should not be in hell if Jesus has already paid for their sins. But the Bible does not say he paid for their sins, it says he paid for the sins of those who believe.

Offline Samothec

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
  • Darwins +49/-2
  • Gender: Male
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #452 on: March 03, 2012, 06:44:09 PM »
Wait just a minute, didn't god already do that? With the flood? So how did all the bad people come back again? Damn, that nasty ol' sin keeps popping up like fungus in a locker room.... :P

But you forget - they were wiped out because they were too evil - god just wanted people to be somewhat evil.
Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding. - Martin Luther

Offline KingofBashan

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 28
  • Darwins +1/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #453 on: March 03, 2012, 06:44:31 PM »
I appreciate everyone's comments and questions. I have tried to answer all of them over the past few hours. I have to go for now. I probably will not be able to continue answering everyone's posts. But I appreciate your willingness to challenge my perspectives, and to try and understand them, and hopefully as time goes by and I make posts in this thread and others you will get a clearer idea of what the Bible has to say about these kinds of issues. Goodnight!  ;D Stay cool.  8)

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6381
  • Darwins +817/-5
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #454 on: March 03, 2012, 06:58:10 PM »
Oh well. KoB has bailed, just when the getting was good.

I about fell off my pointy atheist witch broom when he said that god was not all good. News to me. And kinda negates the need to worship him right there, 'cause then he is just a regular ol' dictator who rules by fear. All powerful, all knowing and not all good? That's a scary program and sounds like some kind of Adolf Stalin Santorum Mao Vader combo platter to me:
 
"Obey or else. Oh yeah, it is impossible for you to obey 'cause I made the requirements too hard. But if you kiss my nether regions enough, I might spare you. Or not. Sucks to be you. Enjoy hell. Bwahahahahah."

What is the point of worshipping such a creature? &)
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline GodlessHeathen

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 274
  • Darwins +9/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Absence of evidence is not evidence of existence.
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #455 on: March 03, 2012, 07:00:25 PM »
KingofBashan,

I see you approach it from a "limited atonement" perspective. That does solve the problem of double jeopardy but still does not solve the problem of the punishment (forever in Hell) not fitting the crime (a lifetime of sins).

Also your explanations do not deal with the crux of the problem. The Judeo-Christian God created humans knowing billions of them would be consigned to eternal suffering from before their very birth. You acknowledge that this is problematic philosophically and to common sense, and that is admirable of you. But if God truly did not want any to perish (and the Bible says he does not), he could have prevented it by never having created mankind in the first place.

And this is just one problem with the concept of the Judeo-Christian God that the Bible portrays. It also has him ordering the slaughter of thousands of babies who did nothing wrong and of nit-picking things like when he killed someone for burning insence in the wrong place.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2012, 07:08:59 PM by GodlessHeathen »
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence" (Christopher Hitchens).

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4577
  • Darwins +104/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #456 on: March 03, 2012, 08:24:46 PM »
Why exactly (and I have never recieved a good answer) did God have Jesus killed? and why did he not wait for the age of cell phone cameras and personal recording devices? Much more convincing than a bunch of scriblings from random people about Jesus LONG after he died(if he even existed)

God did not have Jesus killed. Jesus gave up his own life. He gave up his life to pay the legal penalty against those who believe in him. The Bible teaches Christ came in the "fullness of time", which means he came exactly when God wanted him to.

I have a question for you. What makes you think that Jesus would be more credible today? Everyone would simply claim the evidence had been photoshopped, manipulated etc. From your perspective, what makes modern media more credible than the writings of the Apostles?
would you agree the accounts of Jesus were written long after his death or no? Where has Jesus been since the dawn of the electronic age or God for that matter? to fufill things God wanted Jesus to die no?why? why not just have zombie Jesus live on earth? would be proof posotive he is real....his buddies stealing his body from a "tomb" to make it appear he ascended to heaven is WEAK at best.....even weaker when you consider these were hardly eyewitness transcripts,,,,but the writings of people who never knew or even MET this Jesus Character.

 Much like Joseph smith....if I can get enough suckers to believe me,I may even have a Mormon president someday  :'(
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4577
  • Darwins +104/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #457 on: March 03, 2012, 08:25:58 PM »
A  believer is united to Jesus Christ, which means we will die, but we will be resurrected.

Out of curiosity, what happens to the non-believer? And I am a Hindu, so Christ is not exactly in my list of deities in case I choose to believe. What can happen to me?

Eternal separation from God, biblically known as the second death.
what proof do you have of this? In my nation of origin we are reincarnated,so heaven and hell are as fake as reincarnation is to you

What proof do you have of re-incarnation?
same thing you have STORIES nothing more....as YOU have NOTHING but stories
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4577
  • Darwins +104/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #458 on: March 03, 2012, 08:29:13 PM »
The Bible teaches there are no good people. We have all inherited sin and death. The only person who didn't chose to die for those who would believe on him.

And why should we suffer for something our ancestors did?
and why do some people (believers for the most part) suffer more than fat ugly Americans?
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4577
  • Darwins +104/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #459 on: March 03, 2012, 08:32:57 PM »

There are at least two answers to that question. The first is that our ancestors are good representatives for us (what that means is that if we were in their shoes we would have done the same thing they did).

Many others have and will respond to the rest of the post which I have snipped, but this particular point sticks out.

Are Adam and Eve not also ancestors of Jesus, thus making him guilty in the same manner we are?
FUCKING BRILLIANT +1 if mary is a product of sin as we all are then virgin birth from a damaged human (as YOU say WE all are) means nothing
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4577
  • Darwins +104/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #460 on: March 03, 2012, 08:34:35 PM »

There are at least two answers to that question. The first is that our ancestors are good representatives for us (what that means is that if we were in their shoes we would have done the same thing they did).

Many others have and will respond to the rest of the post which I have snipped, but this particular point sticks out.

Are Adam and Eve not also ancestors of Jesus, thus guilty in the same manner we are?

Jesus is different in two ways: First, he is the Son of God, ie, he does not descend from Adam. He is the new Adam. This means he is a new representative for humanity. Second, he has two natures, he is both human and divine, and he was given the Spirit without measure. This means he is perfectly righteous. He is innocent, he has earned God's favor by living a perfect life, and God accepts him. Those who believe on him have the guilt they inherited from Adam removed and the innocence of Christ given to them as a free gift.
this is your opinion nothing more
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline The Gawd

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 883
  • Darwins +78/-5
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #461 on: March 04, 2012, 11:09:07 AM »

There are at least two answers to that question. The first is that our ancestors are good representatives for us (what that means is that if we were in their shoes we would have done the same thing they did).

Many others have and will respond to the rest of the post which I have snipped, but this particular point sticks out.

Are Adam and Eve not also ancestors of Jesus, thus making him guilty in the same manner we are?
FUCKING BRILLIANT +1 if mary is a product of sin as we all are then virgin birth from a damaged human (as YOU say WE all are) means nothing
Usually the special pleading revolves around natural laws that Christians didnt set up and therefore have no control over. This time its the actual rules the Christian set up. I dont even know the purpose for rules/laws anymore from the Christian perspective because each and everyone is ignored at one point or another.  :?

Offline jss

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 52
  • Darwins +2/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #462 on: March 04, 2012, 12:07:29 PM »
Glossolalia has been linguistically analyzed.  It's an interesting phenomenon because it is found in numerous disparate human cultures in both modern and historic times.  It is possibly neurological in origin although the exact mechanism and/or purpose remains unclear.

Glossolalia resembles normal speech but only superficially.  It is composed of intonation and rhythm taken directly from the speaker's primary language.  It has consonants and vowels and even syllables (again in relationship to the primary language). 

That's where the similarities end.  Glossolalia has significantly fewer syllables than a true primary language; it is consistently less capable of denoting information than normal speech.  It is a 'facade' of language. It is not internally organized; there are no systemic relationships between the units of speech and representative concepts.  Syllables string together but they do not terminate deterministically; i.e. there are no "words".  It is phonologically structured but incapable of signifying meaning; as though the brain is engaging the kinematic element of speech without connection to higher order functions.

Offline ungod

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 580
  • Darwins +15/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Speaking in GoDs Language
« Reply #463 on: March 04, 2012, 02:13:44 PM »
Not only will this video teach you Glossolalia, but proper Church etiquette as well.

Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has.
Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding. - Martin Luther

"What good fortune for those in power that people do not think." - Hitler