Lex:



I am deeply humbled my friend, by one I feel has quite the remarkable creative writing talents...

Thank you... very much...

I humbly bow to you... in appreciation.

The 'you can't stand the topics' comment was not a deeply held belief, my friend... sort of a tongue in cheek, yet I truly did not know, just kinda had a feeling...

I do my very best not to assume anything...




shoes:



There is more than enough reson to believe that there is no such thing as 'free will'... as in anyone has the ability to choose 'right from wrong'... one's choice is conditioned by one's experiences... nothing more... nothing less...




It seems to me that most of the gnostics report Jesus to have spoken parables, and specified that 'God' lives within one... without mentioning himself as fulfilling the Old Testament scripture of being the saviour... or the Christ...

It is my opinion that that was added afterwards... by Christians, in order to promote the growth of Christianity...

Furthermore, I also find many reasons to believe that one may indeed receive without having this understanding. Humility is the key to the recognition of the theif teachings of this world. That which steals one from the essence of spirit within each of us...


Eljay:



This is obvious, when one thinks of literal and physical...

The Romans killed Jesus, as a result of the crowd's response when asked which person they wanted to crucify... either Barnubas or Jesus...

However... let us go back in biblical time a bit... shall we?

In the beginning was 'God'... and Jesus... and the Holy Spirit... according to popular scriptural interpretation today.

Why would Jesus even exist before his purpose has shown itself as necessary?

This suggests that 'God' somehow knew what would happen before it happened... does it not?

Why would a 'God' even bother with such a pathetic creation such as mankind, if 'God' knew it would not be as 'God' wanted?

And where does that leave any evidence for this perfect Christian 'God'?

Perfect is without flaw...

Is mankind in 'Gods' image then?

So then, if a 'God' is capable of this type of knowledge before mankind was created where does this truly leave 'free will'?

Fait accompli... I think not.

Should one still believe that 'God' and Jesus were somehow separate but one before the need for Jesus (man's existance), I would ask this following question:

Is that the best idea that a perfect and an all-powerful and all-knowing 'God' could come up with?

The 'God' which could have created anything... came up with the notion of creating an imperfect and pathetic human race which 'God' knew would fail, before it even existed, therefore created his 'son', who would wait for thousands and thousands of years to be born of a virgin and get murdered....viciously...

That is what makes the Christian 'God' responsible...


If any one of us, as an imperfect human, cannot recognize the absolute absurdity in this... the perfect 'Gods' fix for humanity's sinful ways... then I pity you.

Do you not recognize how absurd this concept of a perfect omni-god which is responsible for all creation truly is?

creative soul I am wayy out of my league here - you obviously are very intelligent. bottom line is I have to have something to believe in .. of course i respect your right to believe in what you want too or not believe.. but you have a great point of the interpetation .. for instance and this one just pops out the word tongues - if you take the greek word it means language so when they talk of hearing something in tongues it means to me that they all understood in thier own language not someone speaking jibberish which I believe is brought on by a form of hypnosis from a preacher with chrisma==I am also sure that the person that is speaking the jibberish does believe that god has spoken to him .. but most people mix up churchology with christianity .. anywho I enjoyed your topic it was well thought of and well written Kudos

shoes:

Thank you...

No one is out of their league here... I just make an attempt to bring up valid questions to that human understanding and emotion which is attributed to 'God'.

I think much of the biblical interpretation stinks out loud of hypocrisy, unjust punishment, illogical human thought, and human (mis)understanding...

I applaud those who seek peace... within themselves...

To me, 'God' is a breath of fresh air when I feel tired.

A second wind to the first of life...

A wonderful thought and/or idea...

The smile on my kids' faces when they picked out their new Jordan's this past Sunday...

A wonderful friendship experienced...

When those two children of mine teach me something new...

The feeling within when love is embraced and shared...

The letting go of that which was not...

The thoughts which will manifest one's reality...

The essence of the elemental existance of that which exists...

The driver of a cab...

The tree in my backyard which I climbed so often as child...

The release of the thief teachings which showed me to myself, thereby beginning the shedding of that which I was not. All the while reminding me of that that which I was... a vessel which carries an essence of eternity...

I am thankful for that which has touched my heart and mind in so many ways... so so thankful... I am blessed more ways than I can count...

The ability to not be offended, when often-times I would have been earlier in life...

The recognition of the mirrored world which lives within us all... and is spoken, quite often...

The knowledge to take nothing that another says too personally...

I did not find all this through what is taught in Christianity, by those who teach it...

I found most of it in spite of the holier-than-thou implications which are predominantly displayed by so many who claim Christianity...

I wonder what this 'God' of Christianity has shown them... of themselves...

well i belive that god created us in his own image so in away we are all little gods .. but that is another topic all together .. I agree with the way you spoke of the smiles the tress in your back yard..When I was a little girl Jesus was sort of an imaginary playmate type person .. I remember well the day I felt that he had left .. but I know that he is back with me now and I need him more than ever .. I understand what you mean about judgemental christians but they are not true followers of christ .. anywho I forgot where I was going with this .. I think I might have had some bad sushi at lunch

Which "rules are we talking about?
the 10 commandments?
cuz other than those, the only other "rules" are made by man.
It's the same syndrome as religion.
Judeo-Christian life is ruled by the 10 commandments.(Which I might add are pretty reasonable.)
The rest of the rules(especially from Catholicism) is just man made gargbage to keep the money flowing in, and to keep the church in power(ESPECIALLY Catholicsim).
Look at the Vatican. It resides in the middle of one of THE poorest neighbourhoods in all of Europe.
What exactly is the Vatican's code of ethics(if it HAS one)?
Why do they not attempt to try and feed the masses as Jesus did???
Sadly, I understand why so many people have such a hard time with the concept of God, His Word, and the Gift of His son, Jesus.
Not enough who believe in it, live by it.

the book of james taught me that I must be a person of deeds but like I said earlier do not confuse christianity with churchology .. that is like saying all muslims are all terrorist which is ridiculous

I'm not up to reading the whole thread, so I will only address the first post.

In your opinion, would a father be a bad parent if:

He stayed up past his child's bedtime?
He drank alcohol, but denied his children alcohol?
He demanded that his children be home before sunset, but sometimes stayed at work much later than sunset?

There are some rules, which should only apply to the children, because they don't possess the reasoning capacity of an adult.

In speaking of the diety of Yahshua. He was killed by the relgious elite. The high council haad him brought in on a charge of blasphemy. When Yahshua would not talk they brought in false witnesses. The govenor would not kill him and sent Yahshua back. That is when Yahshua said Before Abraham was I AM. He was saying he was the one in the burning bush. Now they had what they called a blasphemy charge and sent him back to the govenor Herod. Then he was told he would look weak if this got back to Ceasar. So now aperently as a jester of good will the govenor on passover set a prisoner free of the peoples choice. Now we know they shouted Barabbas. Now this was what the jews were looking for and still are a Barabbas. You see he claimed to be the promiced messiah also.He was killing roman soldiers instead of healing the sick and being just with the people. Barabbas is a Hebrew name. All Hebrew names have meaning just like Yahshua Yahweh Saves Bar Abbas means Son of the father. Even Yahshua cried out abba to his father.But this whole deal of him being murdered by his father is absolutely false. We all have free will. The religious elite had him murdered as they are the ones throughout time who have murdered those who would not conform. Yahshua was willing to break the cycle of death. As we are all guilty. Giving his own life freely to take control out of the Religious elites hands. This is why he is our High Priest. He went before the father on our behalf to send the Holy Spirit. To where. A new Temple made without hands. We are the Temple of Yahweh. This is why the temple was destroyed. Now I saw in anouther post that we keep the ten commandments. Even though this is a very small part of the Temple Christianty refuses to keep what was prophesied would be in That New Temple. Hebrews says it twice and Jeremiah also said it. He said that Holy Spirit would be His Law. Not written on stone. No written in our hearts and minds.Yahshua did not take away the law. He said in Mathew it would be here as long as heaven and earth are here. I believe they are here. The Temple is unclean if after recieving the gift of the Holy Spirit. The Holy spirit will leave.Period. Yahweh's spirit does not live in the unclean.Look at Aaron sons what happened to them. No If that Law does not reside in you willingly the Holy Spirit has left. Christianity and Constantine a heathon Idol worshipper made up modern day Christianity. They mixed with Pagan worship. Do you think Yahweh's spirit is going to resside in anyone who refuses his laws but instead chooses Pagan Idol worship. Why do you think when Yahshua comes back 4/5ths of the population of the world is destroyed. Because they will hate the end time message that is brought back. The same one our Messiah had.And this following his own laws. Just what do you think Yahweh's son did? How was he a spotless lamb of Yahweh? He obeyed what was written in the law. If you claim to follow the messiah, then do what he did. If not then you will suffer the greatest wrath that has ever come on this earth and very likely will be destroyed at his comming. Many want to say nuclear war is going to break out and this is what Zeech is telling us. When Yahshua comes back he will of been with the father for 2000 years. What does this mean. Remember what happened to Moses when his backside and then not much of it. He glowed and had to put a viel on.What do you think they saw at the Transformation when it was said some would not die untill they see Yahshua comming in all his glory.They could not look at him could they. And with out Yahweh's spirit you will not beable to look upon him when he returns. What does it say about no one has done what and lived. If you look at him the picture in Zech 14 will be you. So I would not worry about argueing. I would forget everything you have ever been taught. Read the scriptures for what they say. And I guarantee you they will come alive in your Heart... May Yahweh Be With You .....Blessings...Miles

He didn't. He said "Do not murder". Killing and murdering are not mutually inclusive.

He didn't exist as "Jesus". He was incarnate as Jesus. He went from a "timeless" existance into the realm of time as a man.



That is an absolute in my opinion.



This would indicate that you somehow think you know what God wanted. Presumptuous? Some would say so. God created man with the ability to make choices for himself based upon his reasoning powers with the information at hand. I think He's made His desires of wanting man to be discerning, rightious, and loving - but man does not always make his choices in light of these qualities. But to presume to "know" what God "wants" would be similar to equating one's understanding on a level of God's. I firmly believe that I will never meet anyone in my lifetime of that quality.



In the "hands" of man. The choice is still, and will always be, his/hers. God's knowing the choices made do not pre-empt man's conteol of his own chioces - just the quality of them.



Of course. The "one" is essence - not substance. Substance is an attribute of matter. Since no one has seen God, and the son is able to manifest Himself into human form they must be separate. This does not work itself backwards into now having to be the same form if they are "one in essence". There's nothing to separate their essence. No age differences - one does not have a longer beard than the other, as most of the renessance painters might have you think. So there's no basis to assume that if they are one - they cannot be separate.



Through your standard of morals and ethics you dicount the purpose of the crucifixion and completely miss the gospel message. The resurrection. You tend to ignore this fact, either because you do not understand it, or cannot comprehend it, for it is the essential theme of the "story" as you may term it, and it extends far beyond your standard of ethics. You put the "responsibilities" of man's actions (here's that free-will thing you seem incapable of grasping) onto what you think God should do - other than leave man the choice to do what he does and believe what he deems acceptable. This points the mind of man above God's. It sets the creator above his creation. Perhaps you might want to think a little deeper on how small you are making the God of Christianity? Because you are not even coming close to defining Him, or understanding His attributes.



I don't need your pity. I don't set my standards of God's attributes as low as you do. You're idea of God is just too small. So small in fact - this God you somehow perceive is representative of Christianty - does not exist. It only follows that your perception of it is "absurd".



The responsibility for the state of creation lies in the actions and decisions of man. Not God. He created what he created, man has taken it from there to where it is now.

you waste my time and wear me out! ({you're} not worth it!)

Absolutely amazing...

What has the 'God of Christianity' shown you of yourself?

An omni God could do anything it wanted... knowingly...

Who is missing the point here? You or I?

Knowing what would happen 'if'... then continuing the same path is conducing whatever may happen, assuming 'God' knew...

If 'God' is all powerful and all knowledgeable, then 'God' knew what would come of all 'God' had created, as a result of what 'God' had created. 'God' chose to create this? Is this the best of all possible worlds?

That is what an omnigod would have to produce in order to be one.

There is no omnigod...

Creative In reading through here I forgot what the original post question was but I believe it was the logic or non logic of the omnipotent god and his endless games with the human psyche and our acceptance or non acceptance there of. Is that correct.

I am with you on the illogicalness (my own word I think) of the whole concept. Create that which you love above all else and then continually play mind games with it and make it jump through hoops for you with no guarentees of anything at the end. Hey... I think I dated this guy...lol But yes if you take the reverence out of the whole concept it is actually crazy to think an all powerful being would do this. But I guess the religious could say because he is all powerful we have no concept of his design and therefore cannot question but I question this above all. Never tell me I should not question something because that will really bring my radar up.

If others choose to follow blindly a concept of god created by man for whatever reasons they had for the creation, who am I to say they cannot, but they must accept there are those of us who rely on our logic and need logic to make sense of things and this is not logical.

Eljay:



You have claimed repeatedly that 'God' spoke to Jesus before creation about creation.

Quite simply Eljay... Jesus either existed, at that time, or not...

If he did, it would follow that he did so for a reason...

I touch on this a little more below...

Earlier I had said this:



You replied as such:



So then, it is your belief that 'God' is all-knowledgable. Unless it is some type of selective omniscience, which may be the case, I suppose, but that would hardly constitute all-knowing...



The above statement of mine solicited a response from you, which I have broken down below, in order to comment on the individual notions contained therein:



You would say so, apparently...

Simple logic my friend...

1.) Was Jesus sent because 'God' was pleased with his creation Eljay?

2.)Had man pleased 'God'?

According to the Bible... of course not... need I say more?



This statement above truly has me baffled Eljay...

What are you doing with those words? Explaining to me what 'Gods' desires are, while simultaneously criticizing my words for what you had felt I was doing.


Eljay, there is no such thing as free will... conditioned responses... those exist... everywhere to everyone...

The notion was invented by the biblical authors as a...

Supreme diplomatic immunity for the perfect omni-'God', while the less than perfect creation takes the blame for it's less than perfect abilities...

Perfect produces only perfect... nothing less, lest perfect not be perfect.

When I had said the following:



You never directly addressed the question at hand, but I will respond as best I can to what you did say, in reply. Again, I have broken it down below for clarity...



Point well taken Eljay, and I completely agree with the one in essence notion. It still begs for reasoning to why Jesus existed before man, unless of course, Jesus' purpose had not been established yet... but then that notion would question 'Gods' omniscience, would it not?

Of course as spoken in earlier discussions, you are well aware that I believe that a creator 'God' would have to be indivisible... the only thing which can conceive through itself...



Eljay logic is the basis, something cannot be both... one and separate...


Then you said this, which is quite the assumptive and un-founded conclusion(s) regarding my personal ethics and morality...



Oh, my friend, you have just begun completely unsubstantiated and personal assumptions without a proper knowledge base for understanding me...

I love the story of Jesus, Eljay... absolutely love it and him. Granted, I may not have the same understanding of the parables and the teachings as you, yet I have the understanding which lies beneath. That which is within us.

Christianity was the beginning of the removal of the world's fingerprint which is upon all of us, which thrives on the notion of a separate existance from the essence of our 'God'...

I simply do not believe in the personal omni-god with human emotions...



One cannot grasp that which does not exist.

Conditioned responses exist.




Why would 'God' need to feel superior to his creation, moreover, why do you feel it is necessary?



Actually Eljay, is it the Christian belief system which has attributed human emotion and qualities to 'God'... not I...

Omniscient?

Omnipotent?

Omnibenevolent?

This is a true story...



An 8-year-old once said to the Sunday school teacher...

"Ok, God made everything right?"

"Why yes! God did make everything."

The child responded, "And umm... God is all good right?"

"Yes, that is correct."

" Ok." The child reasoned... perplexed...

"So, what does that leave out, then?"





Eljay, if 'God' knew beforehand of the evil, and 'God' could do whatever 'God' wanted, he did so then...

Hardly a case of pure love there Eljay, wouldn't you say?

This cannot the best of all possible worlds, created by the perfect omni-god...



The only way an omni-god could be considered not responsible for what it created, is if it did not happen...

Knowingly? This 'God' knew what would come? This 'God' is all-powerful, all- knowledgeable, and omni-benevolent?

If one believes that this world is exactly what a perfect 'God' had intended, what does that say about this the character of this 'God'?

That 'God' does not live in me... intentionally allowing torture and needless suffering?

By complacency, if for no other reason...

Wow, ok why would God bother with such a pitiful creation? I have wondered myself that many times over. We are not perfect but a just and loving God chose to give us a chance. He wanted us to 'choose' to love him. Because honestly what makes you happier a stripper paying you attention because that is her job..or a beautiful woman paying you attention because she likes you?...I personally fall in the latter group. I would rather have someone like me for me than someone to like me because i paid them too. That i beleive is WHY god bothered to give us free will. So at first he did make it a perfect world...I mean think about it how could it be any better than roaming around a Garden in tropical weather with your significant other always naked? But he WANTED us to chose to do right. Of course he knew we wouldn't be able to do it because we are NOT perfect. as far as you saying "if 'God' knew it would not be as 'God' wanted?" Tell me how do you know what God wanted? are you one of his advisors?

Ok know for the idea of free will, I will give you another analogy. You want your kids to grow up healthy right? so you teach them how to eat healthy but do your kids always eat healthy?...no they dont. Of course you could line your house with nothing but healthy food but then do you kids really have a choice? no they dont. So you have to include unhealthy food in your house as well in order to give them a choice....Unhealthy food is often immediatly rewarding...sweet provides a pleasant feeling...sorta like sin. But if you continue to eat unhealthy day in and day out what is the outcome? you become obese. Most obese people are not truly happy a lot of them pretend to be but they say they would be happier if they were healthier. However, Healthy food, basically abstaining from unhealthy food is rewarding on another level. Because what is the outcome of this? well...A healthy person who is happier all around. Its a deeper happiness that has been acheived over a certian lifestyle. Ok now after that analogy lets go back to the children...are you happier when they CHOSE to do right? yes. But if you give them a choice between Spinach and Chocalate do you know what they are probably going to chose? yes again. Same thing with God he wants us to CHOSE to do right.

Ok know for this quote "Do you not recognize how absurd this concept of a perfect omni-god which is responsible for all creation truly is?"

Here is a mathematical question for you...
If you covered the entire state of texas with quarters three feet deep, marked one quarter before you dumped them and then randomly had a man parachute out of a plane blindfolded. What are the odds of that man picking the marked quarter up on the first try?....The answer the same as evolution.

Now i admit that i do not know what exactly you believe but based on the math i think the idea of evolution is absurd...just my opinion.

C.S.;

Rather than compound the quotes and turn this into a novel - I will attempt to condense my responses.



In taking a look at the "timeline" of Jesus, it does not state in Genesis that the "us" that is refered to is "Jesus" by name.
It is the conclusion of exegesis on the words Jesus spoke of himself, and the references of Jesus from John. Jesus said "Before Abraham was, I am". That he was the alpha and the omega. John said all things were created through him, and without him nothing was created. Conclusion - Jesus was with God at the creation - he was "the son with whom I am well pleased". But alas - Jesus was incarnate in the flesh. God become man. We have no definitive explination as to just what exactly this means. Since we know as a man he was capable of suffering, and actually dying on a cross - this would seem illogical for the one responsible for all of creation. How can God die? This defies human reasoning (as Rabbit repeatedly insists) So to equate "God the son" at creation with the Jesus who died on the cross and expect there to be no "difference" (as it were) and through that logic conclude that the bible is somehow errant in it's depiction of Jesus, merely leads to an incomplete examination of the exegesis of the incarnation as it extends through all of scripture.





I repeat - this is an absolute.



No - all "knowledgable" is not a term I would use. I would use omniscient. By this, I mean God knows everything that will happen. That which "might happen", or "won't happen" is irrelevant because it is something that will never occur.



Why do you claim "mankind" as pathetic? The most beautiful of all creatures on this earth is woman. I couldn't possibly think of anything else that could be created to surpass this creature. Her creation was perfection!

But moving on...



It is the actions of the creation which displease God. Not the creation itself.



Nonsense. Who else makes your choices for you? It matters not what the conditional responses are, for you decide how you percieve your conditions. I decide which coat I'll wear on a given day based on the decisions I made to aquire my varied options based on how many coats I decided to own. No conditional response was ever needed beyond my experience of not wanting to go outside when it's 20 degree's without a coat on. This didn't make my choice for me - it merely presented me with the option to have a choice. The decision is, and will always be a matter of my "free-will". Based on my decision - which could possibly be to not even wear a coat, I will suffer, or enjoy the consequence of my choice - by either freezing, or remaining warm. Explain to me where this is not "free-will", but some choice an outside entity is making for me?



I would tend to think that your subjective definition concludes that, but I tend to disagree with your logic.



That's man blaming on his boots the fault of his feet.



Unacceptable premise. Because your perception of perfection is subjective.



No, it wouldn't. However, we do know that there are limits to the omniscience of Jesus. Within the realm of time, Jesus tells his disciples that only God (the father) knows the time of armageddon. That however does not make Jesus "lesser" in essence than God the father. While incarnate, Jesus shared the limitations of man. He aged as a man does, and grew in wisdom and knowledge, as a man does. But his essence was light. In him was no darkness. In this way, he retained his "oneness" with God the father. He was the word of God - incarnate. The only means by which God can communicate with the creation, which had fallen. This is the gospel message.



Not so. To be one in essense does not follow that they must be one in existance. Just as one squared is equal to negative one squared, both, as multiplyers are equal in essence, but are different numbers. It may follow that premises can be established to give foundation to your claim - but it would only hold true to the premises you select. That is the essence of logic.






I get no indication from anything you've posted that leads me to believe that you comprehend the ressurection. On the contrary - your logic defies it. If your fellings are otherwise, I would expect to see your posts reflect that. I do not mean to demean you by this observation - I just don't see it in light of your conclusions about the purpose of Jesus' incarnation. You've expressed more than once that it is illogical to you - so why would I think the resurrection is a clear concept to you?



Than who is this Jesus whom you love?



I don't follow your logic on this. I do not disagree that conditional resposes exist, however why do you claim they pre-empt free-will (choice)?



Not necessary - but the discussion of "superiority" is a subjective one, so I'll leave it at that.



"It leaves out the actions of man" the teacher replied. "For God gave man the ability to think and reason for himself, and to make sound choices there after." The teacher continued.

"So make sound decisions."




That remains a question of subjective perception. I don't think it right of God - or any parent for that matter to make decisions for a child in order to "save them from themselves", thus enabling the child and suffocating them from ever discovering how to cope and deal with life on their own. For once the parent stops making decisions for the child - then what? What are they left with? No clue.

Aside from that - as humans, we value life and have no concept of what lies beyond. For this reason we see the victims of violent crimes (resulting in homicide) as the responsibility of God - as though he should have somehow intervened to prevent it.
In actuality, we really have no idea if those victims are better off in heaven with God, than they are down here - scarred and damanged. This is passing the blame onto God for human subjective morals. We dread being victims, so we deem the acts as evil, and blame God - though he is NOT the one pulling the strings, He's the one who's picking up the pieces.
That is the action of a loving God. God's too busy picking up the pieces - you want him to drop the pieces and pull the strings?



So you want a God who is a string puller. One who picks your close out for you and leaves a list on your door for what you are expected to do each day? And what is the God who lives in you doing about the torture and needless suffering that goes on behind closed doors in just this country alone? Seems to me that your God hasn't even left a book to suggest what should be done. Since he's left it up to everyone to decide for themselves - why do we still have torture and needless suffering? Where is your God?!? On break?

isaac:



I would ask you the same question. I will elaborate on the 'free will' comments later on in this post...

As far as your analogies which equate 'God' and man to man and child, only half of that equation could be applicable...

Man is not perfect though, and the omni-god is supposed to be.


Eljay:



Yes, my friend... conversations can seem as novels when written...



I have separated this piece of your comment for a reason... in entertaining the concept of 'God' as a creator, I believe this is the only absolute, all else must follow...



'God' then, knew everything that did happen, before it happened. He saw into the future before it existed.

By logic Eljay, if one knows what will happen, one also knows what will not happen.

I have no argument with this definition, however, it questions the omnibenevolence and omnipotence, as a result, especially if one believes that 'God' answers prayers.

Is this the best of all possible worlds?




Since the actions did happen, then this omni-'God' did know it would, therefore, one must conclude that this 'God' intended for it to happen this way.

This is not the best of all possible worlds, Eljay.




It is not nonsense Eljay. Experience determines perception. Perception equals reality. Not everyone one decides how they perceive, unless they are able to become unsatisfied within themselves and are determined to see the world differently. Differences in experience are necessary to allow the possibility for a difference in perception. However, if one's earliest experiences as a child have culminated into a perception which is so absolute in it's own self-absorbtion that it will not allow a new understanding to be entertained, then the will is determined and not free. Not by one's own choice, but by the choice of whomever taught the child to think in such a way.

Free will cannot be selective to just a few, should it have been an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, 'God' given thing.



Free will does not equate to rational thinking and self-preservation.

Free will began as the ability to choose the difference between doing what your told and not doing what your told, according to the Bible. 'God' told of the tree of knowledge, and to not eat of it... they did not obey... they chose to not obey

Well then, let us re-consider the earlier notion.

If the aforementioned situation involved a child who chose to obey rather than not obey, he chose the right thing to do, as a very small child. However, even though he/she chose right, by obeying, he/she was taught wrong. This thief teaching had begun trapping him/her into a closed-minded world in which all things made sense, according to previously accepted teachings... it all fit well.

The child is an eight-year-old who has obeyed, and learned what he/she has lived... perception equals reality...

The child is on guard duty carrying a machine gun with orders to shoot whomever comes around while the soldiers in the Persian gulf are sleeping.And has... and will again, without remorse.

Free will? I think not.

Conditioned responses exist. Experience is what determines what one's choices are. Perception is what chooses.

What is perceived as real is real in it's affects.

That is an absolute.


Later on you had given this example:



I am not so sure you truly want to use negative numbers to equate a relationship between 'God' and Jesus...

Negative numbers do not exist. Show me, physically what constitutes a value of negative one. Negative numbers equate to an equal measure of non-existance.

Logical premises are indeed selected beforehand, and all must follow.

I have given the premise(with the irrefutable logic to support) that a creator 'God' must be indivisible, to which you had agreed.

Indivisible cannot be divided into separate.



An enlightened man whose words showed me to myself. He who spoke of what lies within one, consistently spoke of what lies within. Is that such a bad thing, Eljay? Do I truly not understand?

That is where.

Ok, I could debate this with you for a long time...
Just like any good debates we both have strong opinions on the subject. But this is my closing. Beleiving in God or Jesus is a mathmatical decision for me as well. Because honestly look at the odds...What is one Garuntee in life? It is the fact that you will eventually die. One day you just won't wake up, your get killed in a car crash something will happen when you no longer have what we call life. So that means i can place my bet on two different things...
Either I can totally chose not to beleive in God and when i die find out that there really is a hell and that i am there for eternity...That would suck.

Or i could chose to beleive in God and live according to his 'instruction' book the bible. And possibly end up in Heavan....What did i really have to give up? the only thing he asked us to do is treat others better than we treat ourselves. And to love him. However, if there is no heavan or hell...Than what did i really lose by living the latter option? really not a whole lot..maybe some of the so called 'pleasures' of sin..But that is a small amount compared to what the possible reward is. Just my opinion.

Ok, I could debate this with you for a long time...
Just like any good debates we both have strong opinions on the subject. But this is my closing. Beleiving in God or Jesus is a mathmatical decision for me as well. Because honestly look at the odds...What is one Garuntee in life? It is the fact that you will eventually die. One day you just won't wake up, your get killed in a car crash something will happen when you no longer have what we call life. So that means i can place my bet on two different things...
Either I can totally chose not to beleive in God and when i die find out that there really is a hell and that i am there for eternity...That would suck.

Or i could chose to beleive in God and live according to his 'instruction' book the bible. And possibly end up in Heavan....What did i really have to give up? the only thing he asked us to do is treat others better than we treat ourselves. And to love him. However, if there is no heavan or hell...Than what did i really lose by living the latter option? really not a whole lot..maybe some of the so called 'pleasures' of sin..But that is a small amount compared to what the possible reward is. Just my opinion.

isaac:

This is a very common line of reason... seems reasonable even, I suppose.

Perhaps though there is another way to place value into the suggestion, from another type of mathematical perspective...


We must first establish a frame of value assessment... with each variable given a value of +1 or -1, in order to establish the mathematical sum of the proposition...

Belief in a biblical 'God' for a believer would be +1...

For a non-believer it would be a -1, because a non-believer would have to disregard their true feelings on the matter. This would be considered a negative thing for someone who had no desire to change their belief system.

So, for a believer your statement would make sense...

A) To believe in this biblical 'God' = +1
B) To live according to this biblical 'God' = +1
C) To live as one truly believes = +1
D) To find out that the biblical 'God' was true = +1
E) To find out the biblical 'God' is false = -1

Simple math for one who tends to believe...

Best case a value of 4... worst case a value of 3...

Nothing to lose right?




However, let us look at the non-believer's perspective, who has their life choices and personal beliefs to lose, should the biblical 'God' prove false...


A) To believe in this biblical 'God' = -1
B) To live according to this biblical 'God' = -1
C) To live as one truly believes = +1
D) To find out that the biblical 'God' was true = -1 or +1
E) To find out the biblical 'God' is false = +1 or -1



If a non-believer chose A and B that value would begin as a -2...

Now then, the only other variables which could change this beginning value are D and E, and then the sum would still total a -1... or a -3...

However, should the non-believer choose C it starts out as a +1... then should D be the case the sum would be 0. Yet, if E was the case then the sum would be +2...



Replace the term 'God' with the term 'hell'... and follow it again, my friend...