100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Does God even care? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
That is debates for .. to reach a point of understanding and usually in debates both sides claim that other side doesn't understand them. Ok I try to push you beyond the words ...I asked /ask you logical questions out of the stoned religious matrix and I hope that you gonna try to give me your ideas abt it. So I asked you simple quetions: If God is a spirit how then He is ours and all the universe's material life/substance a creator? And how you know that he is a spirit ? I think what you are asking is "If God is a spirit, then how is he the creator of the universe and all life?" and "How do you know that God is a spirit?" If so, I would answer this way "If the universe has a creator, then that creator cannot be material. Whoever or whatever created the universe cannot be part of the universe and must somehow be separate. The creator of the universe must exist within it's own dimension of time, because the dimension of time that we exist within is co-terminus with our universe. Physicists of various stripes have proved that the universe had a beginning and will have an end. They have also proved that because of dark matter and dark energy, the universe is not cyclical and therefore not eternal. This means that a being must have decided to create the universe. So what we come up with is a being that isn't physical (the creator created all material), doesn't exist in our universe, is eternal (exists in it's own dimension of time). In English, we would call such a thing a spirit." WoW!!!...that's heavy man.  You are absolutely right, cerieserose, this is heavy. But this is even heavier: I agree with the above a hundred percent. I can only add the thought that while spirit creates matter, the same way matter creates spirit; Man (which is made of matter) creates spirit (God) which survives the holocaust of the demise of matter, and then Spirit creates matter, which later, a few billion years into its existence, creates God again. Thus, just like the above poster said, the physical world is not infinite, and not cyclical either; Instead, the universe is di-polarly cyclical in a manner of matter creating spirit and spirit creating matter in an infinite cycle of bi-partizan existence, That's waaay out there man!!! You're thinking waaaay too hard.  Man does not possess the power nor capability to create a perfect God. The Lord's attributes are sooo supreme; our gray matter is too limited to add a fraction of a thought to the mind of The Almighty. We can borrow ideas from one another share ideas, but we don't possess the mental mechanics to execute the makings of a God. Simply put... We don't have the wherewithal and we don't own the copyrights.  If you truly believe that CeriseRose, then why do you advocate and support the ancient Hebrew folklore as holding a copyright on God? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fallacy: Appeal to Authority. You have yet to mention a single theory that supports your statements, so now you just list a bunch of names. Why don't you tell me what theories support the idea that the universe created itself? Sorry that you're having such difficulty with comprehension Spider. First off, I never stated that the "universe created itself", so that's a totally misguided fallacy on your part. I simply pointed out that whatever created the universe is itself the universe, just like when waves are created on the ocean, nothing new is created other than the waves themselves. But the waves are nothing but the ocean itself undulating. That was my analogy. Also, I have indeed mentioned a theory, clearly you aren't even paying attention. It's the theory of Quantum Mechanics. Plus, this "theory" is not merely a mathematical guess, or hunch, but rather it's an experimentally verified mathematical description of how reality actually behaves. Therefore the panenthesitic nature of reality has been scientifically and observationally verified to be the true mathematical description and nature of reality. Panentheism is a scientifically verified fact. Quantum Mechanics isn't a theory, it's a branch of physics. That's like saying Astrophysics is a theory, NOOOOOO, it's a group of theories and equations that all seek to explain the universe. Quantum Mechanics is based on Quantum Theory, which is what I know you are talking about. It's funny that I know what you are talking about, but you don't. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
CeriseRose
on
Thu 01/06/11 04:57 PM
|
|
That is debates for .. to reach a point of understanding and usually in debates both sides claim that other side doesn't understand them. Ok I try to push you beyond the words ...I asked /ask you logical questions out of the stoned religious matrix and I hope that you gonna try to give me your ideas abt it. So I asked you simple quetions: If God is a spirit how then He is ours and all the universe's material life/substance a creator? And how you know that he is a spirit ? I think what you are asking is "If God is a spirit, then how is he the creator of the universe and all life?" and "How do you know that God is a spirit?" If so, I would answer this way "If the universe has a creator, then that creator cannot be material. Whoever or whatever created the universe cannot be part of the universe and must somehow be separate. The creator of the universe must exist within it's own dimension of time, because the dimension of time that we exist within is co-terminus with our universe. Physicists of various stripes have proved that the universe had a beginning and will have an end. They have also proved that because of dark matter and dark energy, the universe is not cyclical and therefore not eternal. This means that a being must have decided to create the universe. So what we come up with is a being that isn't physical (the creator created all material), doesn't exist in our universe, is eternal (exists in it's own dimension of time). In English, we would call such a thing a spirit." WoW!!!...that's heavy man. You are absolutely right, cerieserose, this is heavy. But this is even heavier: I agree with the above a hundred percent. I can only add the thought that while spirit creates matter, the same way matter creates spirit; Man (which is made of matter) creates spirit (God) which survives the holocaust of the demise of matter, and then Spirit creates matter, which later, a few billion years into its existence, creates God again. Thus, just like the above poster said, the physical world is not infinite, and not cyclical either; Instead, the universe is di-polarly cyclical in a manner of matter creating spirit and spirit creating matter in an infinite cycle of bi-partizan existence, That's waaay out there man!!! You're thinking waaaay too hard. Man does not possess the power nor capability to create a perfect God. The Lord's attributes are sooo supreme; our gray matter is too limited to add a fraction of a thought to the mind of The Almighty. We can borrow ideas from one another share ideas, but we don't possess the mental mechanics to execute the makings of a God. Simply put... We don't have the wherewithal and we don't own the copyrights. If you truly believe that CeriseRose, then why do you advocate and support the ancient Hebrew folklore as holding a copyright on God? We are not the creator nor the original publishers of God's works. Most of what HE created was done before human eyes were here to behold it, and that's a good thing. That is one work that needed copyrighting. The blueprints are well-protected.  Can you imagine?, [Our existence and well-being totally in the hands of mere mortal man]? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quantum Mechanics isn't a theory, it's a branch of physics. That's like saying Astrophysics is a theory, NOOOOOO, it's a group of theories and equations that all seek to explain the universe. Quantum Mechanics is based on Quantum Theory, which is what I know you are talking about. It's funny that I know what you are talking about, but you don't. Face it, your original claims were bogus and based entirely on ideas from classical physics. Trying to pretend that you have a clue about modern physics now is a bit belated. Better stick to your superstitions of ancient gods who are at war with fallen angels and have to have the sons nailed to poles to pacify the demons, or worse yet, to satisfy their own lust for blood sacrifices.  Science is a bit removed from your area of expertise. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quantum Mechanics isn't a theory, it's a branch of physics. That's like saying Astrophysics is a theory, NOOOOOO, it's a group of theories and equations that all seek to explain the universe. Quantum Mechanics is based on Quantum Theory, which is what I know you are talking about. It's funny that I know what you are talking about, but you don't. Face it, your original claims were bogus and based entirely on ideas from classical physics. Trying to pretend that you have a clue about modern physics now is a bit belated. Better stick to your superstitions of ancient gods who are at war with fallen angels and have to have the sons nailed to poles to pacify the demons, or worse yet, to satisfy their own lust for blood sacrifices. Science is a bit removed from your area of expertise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CeriseRose wrote: We are not the creator nor the original publishers of God's works. Most of what HE created was done before human eyes were here to behold it, and that's a good thing. That is one work that needed copyrighting. The blueprints are well-protected. The only "book" that God wrote is the universe itself, and scientists are the only people reading it. Religious people typically reject God's true works. Also you ask: Can you imagine?, [Our existence and well-being totally in the hands of mere mortal man]? That clearly depends on which mortal man (or men and women) might be in charge of that task. Yes, I can absolutely imagine a truly wonderful world being run by mortals. I've read the views of people who have offered very wise opinions on how such a world might be run and managed. I personally would be willing to take on such a task, but only if it was appointed to me by the consensus of the masses. And if they were willing to follow my lead after hearing my proposals. That isn't likely to ever come to pass. Nor to I particularly desire that it should.  But yes, if asked I would graciously offer my wisdom and guidance to humanity as a whole. I'm not selfish. Clearly, the god referred to in the Biblical fables doesn't fair well in his task at raising humans. The Bible clearly confesses that this God loses the vast majority of souls that he creates. So the fables themselves confess that their God is a loser in terms of being an efficient creator. Moreover, if he really did have a bet with a fallen angel that the angel could not corrupt mankind to turn against him, I think it's clearly that he LOST his bet and thus he owes the fallen angel a reward for having WON the bet. (at least if you BELIEVE in what the bible says) Clearly the fallen angel pretty WON hand-down at the time of the Great Flood. God should have conceded that Satan won his bet right there and then. Even after the Great Flood, if we accept the New Testament to be a continuation of these same fables, we have Jesus himself stating clearly that only FEW will make it into the kingdom of God. Thus these fables even have Jesus conceding that Satan has beaten God at their bet. So if you're seeking a picture of a God that you'd like to be in charge of your well-being, why would you choose to believe in fables of a loser God? That makes no sense to me. If our well-being is in the hands of the biblical God then we are truly in bad shape for even according to the gospels even Jesus tells us that only FEW will make it. So the biblical God fails the masses big time. It wouldn't take much of a mortal leader to set up just a few humans with great well-being, whilst ignoring the well-being of the masses. In fact, world leaders to that all the time. Apparently they aren't all that much different from the Biblical God. I would at least make an honest and sincere effort to maintain the well-being of all people. So, in that sense, I'm far superior to the biblical God. At least in terms of caring for the well-being of the masses. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
CeriseRose
on
Thu 01/06/11 05:50 PM
|
|
CeriseRose wrote: We are not the creator nor the original publishers of God's works. Most of what HE created was done before human eyes were here to behold it, and that's a good thing. That is one work that needed copyrighting. The blueprints are well-protected. The only "book" that God wrote is the universe itself, and scientists are the only people reading it. Religious people typically reject God's true works. Also you ask: Can you imagine?, [Our existence and well-being totally in the hands of mere mortal man]? That clearly depends on which mortal man (or men and women) might be in charge of that task. Yes, I can absolutely imagine a truly wonderful world being run by mortals. I've read the views of people who have offered very wise opinions on how such a world might be run and managed. I personally would be willing to take on such a task, but only if it was appointed to me by the consensus of the masses. And if they were willing to follow my lead after hearing my proposals. That isn't likely to ever come to pass. Nor to I particularly desire that it should. But yes, if asked I would graciously offer my wisdom and guidance to humanity as a whole. I'm not selfish. Clearly, the god referred to in the Biblical fables doesn't fair well in his task at raising humans. The Bible clearly confesses that this God loses the vast majority of souls that he creates. So the fables themselves confess that their God is a loser in terms of being an efficient creator. Moreover, if he really did have a bet with a fallen angel that the angel could not corrupt mankind to turn against him, I think it's clearly that he LOST his bet and thus he owes the fallen angel a reward for having WON the bet. (at least if you BELIEVE in what the bible says) Clearly the fallen angel pretty WON hand-down at the time of the Great Flood. God should have conceded that Satan won his bet right there and then. Even after the Great Flood, if we accept the New Testament to be a continuation of these same fables, we have Jesus himself stating clearly that only FEW will make it into the kingdom of God. Thus these fables even have Jesus conceding that Satan has beaten God at their bet. So if you're seeking a picture of a God that you'd like to be in charge of your well-being, why would you choose to believe in fables of a loser God? That makes no sense to me. If our well-being is in the hands of the biblical God then we are truly in bad shape for even according to the gospels even Jesus tells us that only FEW will make it. So the biblical God fails the masses big time. It wouldn't take much of a mortal leader to set up just a few humans with great well-being, whilst ignoring the well-being of the masses. In fact, world leaders to that all the time. Apparently they aren't all that much different from the Biblical God. I would at least make an honest and sincere effort to maintain the well-being of all people. So, in that sense, I'm far superior to the biblical God. At least in terms of caring for the well-being of the masses. History and archeology, reveals that earthly Kingdoms fail because human wisdom is quickly...depleted of the necessary virtues that it takes to deal with human needs in all things needed to sustain humans. A perfect leader would have to have all the virtues of Almighty God to even tolerate the array of personalities of all human beings, or without which, he would resort to inhumane force in his attempt to unify the world and to make them conform to his will. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abra says: ... So, in that sense, I'm far superior to the biblical God. At least in terms of caring for the well-being of the masses. CeriseRose says: History and archeology, reveals that earthly Kingdoms fail because human wisdom is quickly...depleted of the necessary virtues that it takes to deal with human needs in all things needed to sustain humans. A perfect leader would have to have all the virtues of Almighty God to even tolerate the array of personalities of all human beings, or without which, he would resort to inhumane force in his attempt to unify the world and to make them conform to his will. CeriseRose adds: Proverbs 3:5-6 5, Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. 6, In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CeriseRose wrote: History and archeology, reveals that earthly Kingdoms fail because human wisdom is quickly...depleted of the necessary virtues that it takes to deal with human needs in all things needed to sustain humans. A perfect leader would have to have all the virtues of Almighty God to even tolerate the array of personalities of all human beings, or without which, he would resort to inhumane force in his attempt to unify the world and to make them conform to his will. Well if you think the job of a leader is to make people conform to his will then you're in a totally different mindset from me, I can assure you of that. Getting people to conform to your will would not be "leading", it would be "dictating". In fact, that's actually the method employed by the authors who created the fictitious God of the Bible. They were simply trying to enforce dictation rather than attempting to communicate an understanding of what's truly important. That kind of "dictating" mindset is the simplest way to try to control the masses actually. It's a mixture of laziness, and selfishness on the part of the dictator. The precise reason why various kingdoms fail is hard to know for certain, but in many cases it was probably due to human greed rather than a failure to truly build a just and productive world for the entire society. CeriseRose wrote: A perfect leader would have to have all the virtues of Almighty God to even tolerate the array of personalities of all human beings, or without which, he would resort to inhumane force in his attempt to unify the world and to make them conform to his will. I find this quite ironic since the biblical God clearly does precisely what you seen to feel falls short of perfection: "resort to inhumane force in his attempt to unify the world and to make them conform to his will" Does the "The Great Flood" ring a bell? Apparently the Biblical God dose precisely what you feel a perfect Almighty God should not need to resort to. Seems like you're in the same boat with me. You also recognize that the biblical stories do not match up with your idea of what a Perfect God should be like. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abra says: ... So, in that sense, I'm far superior to the biblical God. At least in terms of caring for the well-being of the masses. CeriseRose says: History and archeology, reveals that earthly Kingdoms fail because human wisdom is quickly...depleted of the necessary virtues that it takes to deal with human needs in all things needed to sustain humans. A perfect leader would have to have all the virtues of Almighty God to even tolerate the array of personalities of all human beings, or without which, he would resort to inhumane force in his attempt to unify the world and to make them conform to his will. CeriseRose adds: Proverbs 3:5-6 5, Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. 6, In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths. Well, again, you're quoting from Proverbs which is part of a cannon of fables that has a self-confessed loser God who fails at maintaining the well-being of the vast majority of his creation. So clearly it would be foolish to acknowledge that God for direction since that God loses the vast majority of souls that he creates. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's not necessarily male dominated. The man is to treat the woman with the utmost respect and to love her as himself. To care for her, to provide for her, to love her unconditionally. And no there is no mother necessarily. You're thinking with a secular mind set. God didn't have sex to have us, he created us. He didn't "make" us, he created us and everything that has ever been in existence. Of course Christianity is male dominated. Look around: the Catholic Church won't allow female priests. Many protestant denominations also will not allow women positions of power. The further back in history one goes, the more prevalent the male dominance, but it is still male dominated. How can use god the "father" and accuse me of secular thinking? If Christians used a nongender specific pronoun to refer to deity, then perhaps I could agree with you: let's call god "it." It is god the "father" because Christianity is male dominated! Even Judaism as the aspect of Elohim who is plural and feminine. Was Mary artificially inseminated? Jesus had a corporeal existence: did he have ONLY Mary's DNA? If so, he would have been a clone and would have been female. Of course, I know you will explain it away by saying the humans don't understand and that the whole kebosh was a miracle, but if I buy into that, then I have to buy into Danae being impregnated by a shower of gold. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CowboyGH wrote:
Homosexuality is a choice, a decision. God didn't make them any way, he made them just the same way he made you or I. I see, so god didn't make two faced babies, conjoined twins, babies born with spina bifida, Down Syndrome, Sickle Cell anemia, intersexed (aka hermaphrodites), and a plethora of other defects or syndromes? He made those people just like he made you and me, eh? Then why am I intelligent, female, not conjoined with a twin, have one face, all my appendages, and do not have SC anemia or spind bifida? Why are you not as smart or as good-looking as I am? Don't know what religion you're speaking of. But my father our god has told me that homosexuality is a sin. Our father has told everyone. Some don't listen, some ignore, some just flat out lie and say he didn't say as such. I'm nothing special. Your father didn't tell me anything. I have heard homophobic humans rave about gays, but god didn't say a word. In fact, Jesus loved one of his male disciples "the best." Kinda makes me wonder if Jesus wasn't gay. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We don't know why God chose a way to explain His incredibly important messages in a way that is unclear and leads to arguments and wrong interpretation. But I am sure he has the reason, or the reasoning ability, or at least the ability to explain rationally why He did this explaining this way and not the other way. What a cop-out! Every time a Christian can't explain something he/she doesn't understand in the Bible, that person resorts to "I don't know but god has a reason." Biblical passages are interpreted differently because each denomination will interpret them to fit what the denomination wants to believe--note that I said "wants" to believe. In other cases, Biblical passages are contradictory because someone was a lousy editor. When the disciples asked Jesus why he spoke in parables, he answered, " [. . .]The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven1 has been given to you, but not to them. He spoke in parables because HE DID NOT WANT EVERYONE TO UNDERSTAND. Those who were not the chosen couldn't understand what he said. A loving god would have made sure EVERYONE understood his words. It has been said that the Bible is so deep that theologians cannot touch the bottom, yet so shallow that babes cannot drown." Poppycock. The "deep" things in the Bible are merely those garbled aspects that not understandable. CeriseRose wrote: A perfect leader would have to have all the virtues of Almighty God to even tolerate the array of personalities of all human beings, or without which, he would resort to inhumane force in his attempt to unify the world and to make them conform to his will. I find this quite ironic since the biblical God clearly does precisely what you seen to feel falls short of perfection: "resort to inhumane force in his attempt to unify the world and to make them conform to his will" Does the "The Great Flood" ring a bell? Apparently the Biblical God dose precisely what you feel a perfect Almighty God should not need to resort to. Seems like you're in the same boat with me. You also recognize that the biblical stories do not match up with your idea of what a Perfect God should be like. Not only that, but god plagiarized that story from the Sumerians and Babylonians. He is not even original. Go figure. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
He spoke in parables because HE DID NOT WANT EVERYONE TO UNDERSTAND. Those who were not the chosen couldn't understand what he said. A loving god would have made sure EVERYONE understood his words. God wants everyone (who wants to understand) to understand. If someone doesn't *want* to understand, then God is a gentleman enough to not force himself onto them. If you have absolutely no desire to serve God in life, why would that change in the afterlife? If you have no interest in loving or serving God in life, why should he reward you in the afterlife? A loving God offers himself freely to all people, but forces himself on none. That is the God I worship. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's not necessarily male dominated. The man is to treat the woman with the utmost respect and to love her as himself. To care for her, to provide for her, to love her unconditionally. And no there is no mother necessarily. You're thinking with a secular mind set. God didn't have sex to have us, he created us. He didn't "make" us, he created us and everything that has ever been in existence. Of course Christianity is male dominated. Look around: the Catholic Church won't allow female priests. Many protestant denominations also will not allow women positions of power. The further back in history one goes, the more prevalent the male dominance, but it is still male dominated. How can use god the "father" and accuse me of secular thinking? If Christians used a nongender specific pronoun to refer to deity, then perhaps I could agree with you: let's call god "it." It is god the "father" because Christianity is male dominated! Even Judaism as the aspect of Elohim who is plural and feminine. Was Mary artificially inseminated? Jesus had a corporeal existence: did he have ONLY Mary's DNA? If so, he would have been a clone and would have been female. Of course, I know you will explain it away by saying the humans don't understand and that the whole kebosh was a miracle, but if I buy into that, then I have to buy into Danae being impregnated by a shower of gold. God created man and woman from nothing, why could God not create a human inside another? Yes the woman, Marry, consented to such happening. An angel appeared to her previous to this happening and she didn't reject it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
CowboyGH
on
Fri 01/07/11 09:07 AM
|
|
CowboyGH wrote: Homosexuality is a choice, a decision. God didn't make them any way, he made them just the same way he made you or I. I see, so god didn't make two faced babies, conjoined twins, babies born with spina bifida, Down Syndrome, Sickle Cell anemia, intersexed (aka hermaphrodites), and a plethora of other defects or syndromes? He made those people just like he made you and me, eh? Then why am I intelligent, female, not conjoined with a twin, have one face, all my appendages, and do not have SC anemia or spind bifida? Why are you not as smart or as good-looking as I am? Don't know what religion you're speaking of. But my father our god has told me that homosexuality is a sin. Our father has told everyone. Some don't listen, some ignore, some just flat out lie and say he didn't say as such. I'm nothing special. Your father didn't tell me anything. I have heard homophobic humans rave about gays, but god didn't say a word. In fact, Jesus loved one of his male disciples "the best." Kinda makes me wonder if Jesus wasn't gay. I see, so god didn't make two faced babies, conjoined twins, babies born with spina bifida, Down Syndrome, Sickle Cell anemia, intersexed (aka hermaphrodites), and a plethora of other defects or syndromes? He made those people just like he made you and me, eh? Then why am I intelligent, female, not conjoined with a twin, have one face, all my appendages, and do not have SC anemia or spind bifida? Why are you not as smart or as good-looking as I am? You say it like these people are lesser of humans. We ALL have our own differences, some we see as negative, some we see as positive. But nevertheless, we are ALL made differently, why pick and point out one particular difference? Do these things you mention make them any less of a person? If so, why and who are you to make that judgement? We all have our own vises throughout life we have to over come, what makes their "vises" more prevalent then another's? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
He spoke in parables because HE DID NOT WANT EVERYONE TO UNDERSTAND. Those who were not the chosen couldn't understand what he said. A loving god would have made sure EVERYONE understood his words. God wants everyone (who wants to understand) to understand. If someone doesn't *want* to understand, then God is a gentleman enough to not force himself onto them. If you have absolutely no desire to serve God in life, why would that change in the afterlife? If you have no interest in loving or serving God in life, why should he reward you in the afterlife? A loving God offers himself freely to all people, but forces himself on none. That is the God I worship. amen!! very well put. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
CowboyGH
on
Fri 01/07/11 09:07 AM
|
|
CowboyGH wrote: Homosexuality is a choice, a decision. God didn't make them any way, he made them just the same way he made you or I. I see, so god didn't make two faced babies, conjoined twins, babies born with spina bifida, Down Syndrome, Sickle Cell anemia, intersexed (aka hermaphrodites), and a plethora of other defects or syndromes? He made those people just like he made you and me, eh? Then why am I intelligent, female, not conjoined with a twin, have one face, all my appendages, and do not have SC anemia or spind bifida? Why are you not as smart or as good-looking as I am? Don't know what religion you're speaking of. But my father our god has told me that homosexuality is a sin. Our father has told everyone. Some don't listen, some ignore, some just flat out lie and say he didn't say as such. I'm nothing special. Your father didn't tell me anything. I have heard homophobic humans rave about gays, but god didn't say a word. In fact, Jesus loved one of his male disciples "the best." Kinda makes me wonder if Jesus wasn't gay. Your father didn't tell me anything. I have heard homophobic humans rave about gays, but god didn't say a word. In fact, Jesus loved one of his male disciples "the best." Kinda makes me wonder if Jesus wasn't gay. God has told you, you choose not to give merit to what he has said. He told us of this a long time ago so of course as to not allow things to get changed it was written down in scriptures. We have these exact same scriptures in a book called the Holy Bible that people had since the beginning of the scriptures. Again you just choose not to give merit to these scriptures. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Spidercmb
on
Fri 01/07/11 09:17 AM
|
|
I see, so god didn't make two faced babies, conjoined twins, babies born with spina bifida, Down Syndrome, Sickle Cell anemia, intersexed (aka hermaphrodites), and a plethora of other defects or syndromes? God created Adam and Eve, it's been genetics at work since then. Yes, God gives us our spirit, but our bodies are the result of the genetics of our parents. Why are you not as smart or as good-looking as I am? Stay classy. Your father didn't tell me anything. I have heard homophobic humans rave about gays, but god didn't say a word. In fact, Jesus loved one of his male disciples "the best." Kinda makes me wonder if Jesus wasn't gay. Funny, I thought it was mostly gays and goths who went to raves. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spider wrote: God created Adam and Eve, it's been genetics at work since then. Yes, God gives us our spirit, but our bodies are the result of the genetics of our parents. Well, then why didn't God give everyone a great spirit like he gave me? Does it really matter whether it's physical or non-physical? If someone is a "bad" spirit it can only be because that's what they were created to be. Of course, we know that isn't true. Modern medicine and psychology have shown us that our physical bodies can indeed play a large role in our personality and behavior. Even what we eat can affect our mood and what's a mood but your current personality? And what's your personality but your spirit? The whole thing falls apart when you try to totally separate spirit from flesh. That kind of ideal just can't be made to work. Of course, as I've already clearly shown so many times, none of the major premises of the Bible hold up to rational examination. They all fail miserably. Your father didn't tell me anything. I have heard homophobic humans rave about gays, but god didn't say a word. In fact, Jesus loved one of his male disciples "the best." Kinda makes me wonder if Jesus wasn't gay. Funny, I thought it was mostly gays and goths who went to raves. I thought God wasn't supposed to play "favorites". So how could Jesus love one his disciples "the best"? That's just brings up another huge contradiction in the biblical scriptures. The gospels have Jesus saying that any man who breaks the least of his commandments will be the least in heaven. Well, that can only mean that heaven is a hierarchical society and God won't consider everyone who makes it to heaven to be equivalent. Moreover, it also implies that "sins" won't be forgiven in heaven, they will continually be held over a person for all of eternity, since that person will be the "least in heaven" presumably forever. So clearly the old religious saying that the blood of Jesus can wash away sins is apparently false. The sins remain and are continually held against the person even in heaven. Of course, for me, this contradiction is moot because I don't believe these fables verbatim anyway. But it must be extremely disturbing for any Christian who had hopes of having their sins forgiven and washed away by Jesus. Looks like they are going to be really disappointed when they find out they'll be given latrine duty in heaven for eternity and never be given any real respect. I wonder why Catholics feel that there needs to be a purgatory since it appears that, according to Jesus, purgatory will be contained in heaven itself. It can't be all that great to be the 'least' in heaven for all of eternity. |
|
|
|
|
