Pauligirl
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Feb, 2008 09:54 pm
Intrepid wrote:


Where do you get this information? I am not aware of Christians who think this way. I do read my bible. It is unfortunate that you use it for a different purpose.



http://mediamatters.org/items/200509130004
Religious conservatives claim Katrina was God's omen, punishment for the United States
0 Replies
 
Pauligirl
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Feb, 2008 10:06 pm
http://www.usbible.com/God/god_and_natural_disasters.htm
Quote:
God and natural disasters
When I googled "god" and "tsunami" I expected to find some asinine interpretations and I wasn't disappointed.
From Pat Robertson's CBN.com website, there was the claim that "God's tsunami had to do with "Israel and End-time Prophecy." Reminiscent of Orwell's famous dictum "WAR IS PEACE," the writer has the audacity to assert that this was a step towards bringing lasting peace to the Middle East.
We have learned that Jesus, the Prince of Peace, is the only Ruler who can bring lasting peace to the Middle East. Jesus said that His kingdom is "not of this world," but this kingdom has the power to change lives. In our journey, we have discovered a spiritual home in the culture of God's kingdom. This home is a "city which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God." (Hebrews 11:10)
On another CBN.com page, the same writer, Peter Tsukahira, invoked The Principle of Prophetic Alignment. He argues "Jesus taught and demonstrated that His life and ministry were completely in agreement with the prophecies given to Israel by the biblical prophets." Then he cites some passages from Ezekiel to demonstrate that "According to Ezekiel, Israel is again God's instrument, His means to show His glory and His character to the entire world." In short, all this conflict and human suffering in the Middle East stems from God's plan to restore the nation of Israel by savaging its enemies.
The Washington Times reports that some Muslim clerics see the death of tens of thousands of Muslims as designed to punish Christians ?- supposedly because the tsunami hit on December 26, the day after Christmas, the worst time for defying Allah. The Washington Time's polar opposite, Al Jazeera, reports that "right-wing rabbis" claim that God "was angry with the nations that did not help Israel…"
I don't want to imply that this blame-game is representative of the whole religious community. Some have a hard time reconciling this disaster with God's goodness while others divorce God from what they see as a natural disaster. Wedded to his belief in an omnipotent and omni-benevolent God, the Sainted Augustine straddled the middle by arguing that what we see as evil is intended to make for a greater good. This rationale reminds me of Lenin's dictum: "One cannot make scrambled eggs without first breaking the eggs." It has been 2,000 years since the time of Jesus and yet no omelet appears on the horizon. Clearly, this problem of omnipotence and evil has befuddled God's faithful.
In March 2005 issue of Liberty Magazine, I found an eloquent reconciliation by Bart Kosko. He reasons that while science cannot refute the existence of God by direct evidence, the lack of evidence is strong but not completely conclusive. At minimum, I think he refutes the idea of a biblical god, so I've taken the liberty to copy his essay verbatim.
God: killer, bumbler or fake?
There are only three main ways to reconcile traditional concepts of God with the horrific carnage of the Asian mega-tsunami. Each way is a hypothesis that depends on whether God cause the tsunami. And each leaves God with a lot to answer for.
· Suppose that God caused the tsunami. Then the first hypothesis is that God is a murderous fiend.
This murderer hypothesis follows if God not only caused the tsunami but intended to cause it. Causality is easy to show for an omnipotent or all-powerful being. Such a God can cause any event by simply willing it and then His will be done. Indeed tsunamis are just the kind of force majeure that we call an Act of God.
The sharper question is whether God intended to cause the tsunami and its disastrous aftermath and thus whether He deliberately killed over 150,000 innocent children and adults. The law defines intent as either desiring an outcome or being substantially certain that the outcome will occur. Assume that God did not desire to cause such death and destruction. That still won't get Him off the hook.
The clincher here is God's alleged omniscience or complete knowledge. Set aside the argument from philosophers that omniscience is logically impossible because it requires knowing all truths and because there is no set of all mathematical truths (a consequence of Cantor's Theorem: a set always has less size or "cardinality" than the set of all its subsets). So go ahead and grant that God has omniscience and perfect foresight. Then God does not play dice because for Him there is no probability or uncertainty. God knows with certainty the causal consequences of everyone's actions and of His own actions.
· So God intends His actions ?- and so God is a mass murderer.
The verdict is worse than this because God shows no remorse and because He deliberately continues to compound the problem. It does not matter that He may be all-loving. God's alleged omnipotence lets Him resurrect the dead tsunami victims and fix the other damage that He has caused. But He refused to do so. Instead God lets the victims' relatives grieve and lets disease spread and lets children suffer abuse.
· The second hypothesis is that God caused the tsunami but He did not intend to.
It just sort of happened after He unleashed the Big Bang 15 billion years ago and imposed the laws of physics on all matter and energy. The Universe Maker is still responsible for His dangerous product.
This careless or negligent God does not really count as God because he lacks omniscience ?- since omniscience implies intent and thus no intent means no omniscience. Yet this might be the God that many inadvertently pray to. It is pointless to pray to an omniscient God because he already knows the content of the prayer. Prayer itself is nothing more than asking for a divine handout and thus borders on blasphemy. The request is not a waste of time and effort for all concerned only if it tells God something that He did not already did not know. But then He lacks omniscience and that in turn suggests that He is not all powerful or omnipotent. How can you have total power over everything for all eternity and yet not know everything?
Such lack of knowledge would itself be a lack of power and hence there could be no omnipotence either. So this creature would not be God ?- but He would still be liable for multiple counts of wrongful death if not criminal negligence.
· This leaves the third category where God did not cause the tsunami.
Here there are many variations on the simplest hypothesis of all: There is no God. So God did not cause the tsunami or anything else.
The no-God hypothesis is what statisticians call the null hypothesis. It is the default hypothesis that we try to reject or refute with evidence to the contrary as when physicians test to see if a new drug has a predicted effect. Failure to reject the no-God hypothesis does not mean that we accept it as true although it does point in that direction. It technically means that so far the evidence has not knocked down the claim.
· So it goes with God.
Science has not found a single footprint or miracle that would refute the null hypothesis that there is no God and thus support the claim that there is a God. The microscopes and telescopes have found no trace of Him whatsoever. This negative evidence is strong but not completely conclusive because the universe is a big place and a God signal may still turn up.
Until then what science can explain with God it can explain without God. The tsunami arose from natural causes ?- and did everything and everyone else in the universe.
Final thought
If we stick to the God hypothesis, we might ponder, if God thinks so much of Israel, why He went to extremes to empower Hitler to kill six million Jews. Before the advent of agricultural science, man was beset with great famines. Before the advent of medical science man was beset with pestilence. In the fourteenth century, one third of Europe's population was killed by the Bubonic plague at a time when Christian sentiments were at their strongest. The plague was blamed on Jews and set off a wave of Jewish persecution. It would appear to me that man derives his salvation from God through science. This would argue against a supernatural God and for a natural God. Mother Nature perhaps?
End
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2008 07:37 am
Quote:
xingu but thats just it, the things you believe show evil in God's character, i view differently.

Nice to know you view this behavior of your God as love, justice not to mention a sane and stable mind.
Quote:
Hosea 13:16
Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.

Quote:
Psalms 137:8
O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy [shall he be], that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us.

137:9
Happy [shall he be], that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.

Quote:
Hosea 9:13
Ephraim, as I saw Tyrus, [is] planted in a pleasant place: but Ephraim shall bring forth his children to the murderer.

9:14
Give them, O LORD: what wilt thou give? give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts.

9:15
All their wickedness [is] in Gilgal: for there I hated them: for the wickedness of their doings I will drive them out of mine house, I will love them no more: all their princes [are] revolters.

9:16
Ephraim is smitten, their root is dried up, they shall bear no fruit: yea, though they bring forth, yet will I slay [even] the beloved [fruit] of their womb.

9:17
My God will cast them away, because they did not hearken unto him: and they shall be wanderers among the nations.

Notice the last quote; "My God will..."

How many Gods are there?

Quote:
That leads me to believe that you don't really want to debate, you just want to bash the bible.

This debate is about the contents of the Bible, not praising the Lord.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2008 08:22 am
Intrepid wrote:
Perhaps you could describe fear as it pertains to "The fear of God". You are trying to put things into your own mindset. I know that you cannot provide proof of this allegation.

Guess you don't read the Bible much.
Quote:
Deuteronomy 28:58
If thou wilt not observe to do all the words of this law that are written in this book, that thou mayest fear this glorious and fearful name, THE LORD THY GOD;

28:59
Then the LORD will make thy plagues wonderful, and the plagues of thy seed, [even] great plagues, and of long continuance, and sore sicknesses, and of long continuance.

28:60
Moreover he will bring upon thee all the diseases of Egypt, which thou wast afraid of; and they shall cleave unto thee.

28:61
Also every sickness, and every plague, which [is] not written in the book of this law, them will the LORD bring upon thee, until thou be destroyed.

28:62
And ye shall be left few in number, whereas ye were as the stars of heaven for multitude; because thou wouldest not obey the voice of the LORD thy God.

A rather pathetic and psychopathic God.
Quote:
Zephaniah 3:5
The just LORD [is] in the midst thereof; he will not do iniquity: every morning doth he bring his judgment to light, he faileth not; but the unjust knoweth no shame.

3:6
I have cut off the nations: their towers are desolate; I made their streets waste, that none passeth by: their cities are destroyed, so that there is no man, that there is none inhabitant.

3:7
I said, Surely thou wilt fear me , thou wilt receive instruction; so their dwelling should not be cut off, howsoever I punished them: but they rose early, [and] corrupted all their doings.

3:8
Therefore wait ye upon me, saith the LORD, until the day that I rise up to the prey: for my determination [is] to gather the nations, that I may assemble the kingdoms, to pour upon them mine indignation, [even] all my fierce anger: for all the earth shall be devoured with the fire of my jealousy.

3:9
For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the LORD, to serve him with one consent.

3:10
From beyond the rivers of Ethiopia my suppliants, [even] the daughter of my dispersed, shall bring mine offering.

3:11
In that day shalt thou not be ashamed for all thy doings, wherein thou hast transgressed against me: for then I will take away out of the midst of thee them that rejoice in thy pride, and thou shalt no more be haughty because of my holy mountain.

3:12
I will also leave in the midst of thee an afflicted and poor people, and they shall trust in the name of the LORD.


Now I'm waiting in eager anticipation for Christians to re-translate the Bible to show us that what is said is not said.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2008 08:37 am
Intrepid wrote:
Where did I suggest that you only read part of the bible. You would have to read the whole thing in order to understand what I was referring to. Obviously, you have not.

Did I mention you by name or do you see only what you choose to see?
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2008 08:39 am
The fact that the bible is used as an ambidexter implement and seeming justification for evil does not disprove its divine inspiration.

That it could happen was astutely noted by Christ:

"I publicly praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intellectual ones and have revealed them to babes." (Matthew 11:25)

So, you see, xingu, your problem is that you are too smart.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2008 08:50 am
Some more on fear and Christianity from the following site. Fear God because if you don't, if you take God lightly he will do some very bad things to you.
http://www.religionfacts.com/christianity/beliefs/hell.htm

Hell in the New Testament
In the New Testament, the notion of hell is more clearly expressed, but still not in a systematic way. In many cases, "death" and "destruction" are the only mentioned penalties for rejecting God (e.g., Matthew 7:13, John 3:16, Acts 4:12, Romans 6:23, 2 Thessalonians 1:9, James 1:15). Also, as noted in the section above, the same terminology is often used in the New Testament that in the Jewish context may have suggested nothing more than physical death and destruction of the soul.

New Testament passages that have suggested eternal torment to Christians include the following:

"Anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell." (Matthew 5:22, quoting Jesus)

"And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell." (Matthew 5:29, quoting Jesus; see parallel passage in Mark 9:44, which adds, "where the fire never goes out.")

"Do not be afriad of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell." (Matthew 10:28, quoting Jesus)

"As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age. The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." (Matthew 13:40-42, quoting Jesus)

"Throw that worthless servant outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." (Parable of the Talents, Matthew 25:30)

"Then he [the King] will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels." (Parable of the Sheep and the Goats, Matthew 25:41)

"The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole person, sets the whole course of his life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell." (James 3:6)

"The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. If anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire." (Revelation 20:13-15)

"The cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile...the idolaters and all liars - their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulpher. This is the second death." (Revelation 21:8)

The Doctrine of Hell in the Church Fathers
In the church fathers (post-New-Testament Christian leaders and theologians), the doctrine of hell quickly becomes more well-defined as a place of eternal torment, which is generally seen as physical in nature: {5}

"The way of darkness is crooked, and it is full of cursing. It is the way of eternal death with punishment." (Pseudo-Barnabas, c. 70-130 AD)

"You should fear what is truly death, which is reserved for those who will be condemned to the eternal fire. It will afflict those who are committed to it even to the end." (Letter to Diognetus, c. 125-200)

"[The martyrs] despised all the torments of this world, redeeming themselves from eternal punishment by the suffering of a single hour.... For they kept before their view escape from that fire which is eternal and will never be quenched." (Martyrdom of Polycarp, c. 135)

"Sinners will be consumed because they sinned and did not repent." (Shepherd of Hermas, c. 150)

"Those who have not known God and do evil are condemned to death. However, those who have known God and have seen his mighty works, but still continue in evil, will be chastised doubly, and will die forever." (Shepherd of Hermas, c. 150)

"We believe...that every man will suffer punishment in eternal fire according to the merits of his deed. ... Sensation remains to all who have ever lived, and eternal punishment is laid up." (Justin Martyr, c. 160)

"Hell [Gehenna] is a place where those who have lived wickedly are to be punished." (Justin Martyr, c. 160)

"Some are sent to be punished unceasingly into judgment and condemnation of fire." (Justin Martyr, c. 160)

"We who are now easily susceptible to death, will afterwards receive immortality with either enjoyment or with pain." (Tatian, c. 160)

"We are persuaded that when we are removed from the present life we will live another life, better than the present one...or, if they fall with the rest, they will endure a worse life, one in fire. For God has not made us as sheep or beasts of burden, who are mere by-products. For animals perish and are annihilated. On these grounds, it is not likely that we would wish to do evil." (Athenagoras, c. 175)

"To the unbelieving and despisers...there will be anger and wrath, tribulation and anguish. At the end, everlasting fire will possess such men." (Theophilus, c. 180)

"Eternal fire is prepared for sinners. The Lord has plainly declared this and the rest of the Scriptures demonstrate it." (Irenaeus, c. 180)

"All souls are immortal, even those of the wicked. Yet, it would be better for them if they were not deathless. For they are punished with the endless vengeance of quenchless fire. Since they do not die, it is impossible for them to have an end put to their misery." (Clement of Alexandria, c. 195; from a post-Nicene manuscript fragment)

"We [Christians] alone make a real effort to attain a blameless life. We do this under the influence of... the magnitude of the threatened torment. For it is not merely long-enduring; rather, it is everlasting." (Tertullian, c. 197)

"Gehenna... is a reservoir of secret fire under the earth for purposes of punishment." (Tertullian, c. 197)

"There is neither limit nor termination of these torments. There, the intelligent fire burns the limbs and restores them. It feeds on them and nourishes them. ... However, no one except a profane man hesitates to believe that those who do not know God are deservedly tormented." (Mark Minucius Felix, c. 200)

However, some early church fathers, such as Origen of Alexandria and Gregory of Nyssa, questioned the eternality of hell and the literal interpretation of it as a fiery place. {6}

Modern Christian Views of Hell
Modern Christian views of hell tend to emphasize its spiritual aspects over the notion of physical suffering or material fire. Hell is seen as a logical extension of the free will of mankind to reject God's gracious advances, even for eternity, and its punishment as a realization of one's mistake and the great remorse that would follow. Many modern Christians also question hell's eternality in favor of some form of universalism (all are saved in the end) or annihilationism (wicked souls are destroyed).

Following is a sampling of the positions of various Christian denominations on the issue of hell.

It is impossible to describe the glory and splendor of heaven and the terror and torment of hell. Whether taken literally or figuratively, the meaning is the same: Hell is a place where one will experience total separation from God; heaven enjoys the total presence of God. Knowing that this is the horrible end awaiting the wicked, the Assemblies of God is strongly motivated to win the lost before it is too late. (Assemblies of God)

To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God's merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self- exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called "hell." (Catechism of the Catholic Church)

The statement of Christ in Matthew 25, and elsewhere, are taken at face value. It is believed that after death each man must come before God in judgment and that he will be judged according to the deeds done while he lived (Hebrews 9:27). After judgment is pronounced he will spend eternity either in heaven or hell. (Churches of Christ)

We believe that glorious and everlasting life is assured to all who savingly believe in, and obediently follow, Jesus Christ our Lord; and that the finally impenitent shall suffer eternally in hell. (Church of the Nazarene)

This hope for the final salvation of humanity and the eternal universal restitution of all things in heaven and on earth ... is drawn from the unlimited promise of the Gospel and the magnitude of God's grace made known to the world through Christ. (Evangelical Lutheran Church of America)

We believe in the bodily resurrection of the dead; of the believer to everlasting blessedness and joy with the Lord; of the unbeliever to judgment and everlasting conscious punishment. (Evangelical Free Church of America)

The moral progress of the soul, either for better or for worse, ends at the very moment of the separation of the body and soul; at that very moment the definite destiny of the soul in the everlasting life is decided. ... The Orthodox Church believes that at this moment the soul of the dead person begins to enjoy ... the life in Paradise or to undergo the life in Hell. There is no way of repentance, no way of escape, no reincarnation and no help from the outside world. (Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America)
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2008 09:28 am
Like I said, xingu, you are so smart you speed read all that BS.

If anything more than death were the consequence of sin, Adam and Eve would have been told that straight off.

It's like I've said all along, unbelievers have no need to create straw men when the priests create them in abundance.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2008 09:53 am
neologist wrote:
The fact that the bible is used as an ambidexter implement and seeming justification for evil does not disprove its divine inspiration.

That it could happen was astutely noted by Christ:

"I publicly praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intellectual ones and have revealed them to babes." (Matthew 11:25)

So, you see, xingu, your problem is that you are too smart.


No, Neo, I'm not too smart. I'm seeing the "bad parts" of the Bible in the same literal sense as Christians see the "good parts."

But Christians don't seem to want to see this evilness in their loving God. So there must be some esoteric meaning behind the Bible's uncomfortable passages. I guess when God wants to kill children there's a message of love hidden from me. Christians can see love in God's slaughter of families because they feel his love. Myself being blind to the Biblical "God's love" denies me the insight to understanding the love behind bashing children to death. For some strange reason I still see it as evil.

Out of curiosity, if we see the goodness and love in God for killing Babylonian children because of what the Babylonians did to His Chosen, would it be wrong to kill Iranian children because we think Iranians want to destroy His Chosen?

Quote:
Christian Zionists -- Christian evangelicals who avow support of Israel based on a belief in Biblical end-times scenarios -- are whipping their followers into a fervor in favor of an attack on Iran. In a related development, conservative commentators like former House Speaker Newt Gingrich have been beating the drum for a US attack on Iran, characterizing the current conflict in Lebanon as the start of "World War Three."

http://www.jewsonfirst.org/06b/cufi.html

Would it not have been nice if God was wish enough to write a book that all would understand? Alas, it appears God was not that wise. That's why we have Hagee's.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2008 10:49 am
xingu,

You just don't want to seem to except the fact that God destroys the wicked. He gives people plenty of chance to repent and do right. He makes it clear that He does not tolerate wickeness.

It's His right xingu. He is the creator. The creation cannot dictate to the creator what the creator should and should do or be.

Do I like the fact that He destroys the wicked? As a human, no I don't like to think of anyone being destroyed, killed, etc. But I am not God. He is.

If God did not provide a way out for us I'd probably feel the way you do, but He does provide us a way out.

I'm always amazed at how non-believers will believe every single thing in the Bible that bolsters their point of God being evil. You have to consider the whole counsel of God, not just the part you want to see.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2008 11:39 am
xingu wrote:
. . . No, Neo, I'm not too smart. I'm seeing the "bad parts" of the Bible in the same literal sense as Christians see the "good parts."

But Christians don't seem to want to see this evilness in their loving God. So there must be some esoteric meaning behind the Bible's uncomfortable passages. . .
Not esoteric. Not evil. Quite plain, in fact. Though inconvenient.
0 Replies
 
vikorr
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2008 02:59 pm
Quote:
xingu,

You just don't want to seem to except the fact that God destroys the wicked. He gives people plenty of chance to repent and do right. He makes it clear that He does not tolerate wickeness.


Arella, your comments are often problematic on this topic. Please explain how can the babies be wicked?

Quote:
It's His right xingu. He is the creator. The creation cannot dictate to the creator what the creator should and should do or be.


Can't argue with that. Can argue that he asks 'us' (ie humans) to carry out his sentence. If he wants babies dead, he should do it himself. (I would say the same for other people, like the Canaanites, but that seems a little less clear to Christians than babies, so babies as example it is)

Quote:
If God did not provide a way out for us I'd probably feel the way you do, but He does provide us a way out.


Babies anyone?

And does anyone honestly believe in a whole population of evil people? Any comparison with any countries society/culture today, shows that this just isn't possible.

Quote:
I'm always amazed at how non-believers will believe every single thing in the Bible that bolsters their point of God being evil.
Why is this amazing? It seems normal and natural that if someone goes around dashing babies brains out, that you call the person evil...why then should our view of a God who does that be any different?

Genocide is certainly viewed as evil in todays world.

Quote:
You have to consider the whole counsel of God, not just the part you want to see.


As I mentioned before to someone - the Loving side of God is not in question. What is being questioned is the dark/evil/bad/nasty/fearful (whatever you like to use) side of God.
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2008 03:22 pm
xingu wrote:
Intrepid wrote:
Where did I suggest that you only read part of the bible. You would have to read the whole thing in order to understand what I was referring to. Obviously, you have not.

Did I mention you by name or do you see only what you choose to see?


You said it in a reply to my post. I guess you are not as smart as Neo gives you credit for. Perhaps you could tell us who you were replying or referring to. Thank you.

Intrepid wrote:
Quote:
....and you go back to the same old stuff when someone talks about the the New Testament and how it brought about change and is the basis for Christianity.


xingu wrote:
Quote:
Your missing a few points here Intrepid.

First off the NT does not in any way absolve your God from the evil that said God did in the OT. It would be the same as a serial killer saying he has decided not to kill anymore so we can all forget what he has done in the past. It doesn't count anymore.

Second the God of the OT ruled by fear. The same God rules in the same manner in the NT. Same God, same style.

Why do you think so many Christians believe natural disasters are caused by God? Read your Bible Intrepid. God killed people through natural disasters.

One last thing. Whenever I discuss religion with Christians invariably one of them will say "Read the whole Bible". Now I have one suggesting that I read only part of the Bible.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2008 04:25 pm
You know, some of you keep acting like we Christians like the fact that babies were also killed. I highly doubt anyone likes that fact. But, it doesn't matter what we like or not. God had His reasons for it. He's God. We aren't. If He wanted to He could wipe this whole world out in a single blink of an eye and there's nothing anyone can do about it.

Like I said, He gives people chances to repent and turn away from their wickedness. He leaves the decisions in our hands and He makes the consequences very clear.

This life is but a vapor...................spiritual and eternal life are what is important.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2008 05:50 pm
What a lot of people fail to realize is one huge consequence of the rebellion in Eden has been the temporary delegation of the affairs of this world to the rebel.

Recall that Jesus, when tempted by this rebel with all the kingdoms of this world, did not deny that the rebel had the right to offer them. (Matthew 4:9)

In John 14:30, he identified this one as the "ruler of this world."

This rebel is the same "god of this system of things [who] has blinded the minds of the unbelievers. . ." (2Corinthians 4:4)

Those of you who are quick to blame God for the misery in this world should understand that the bible points in a different direction.
0 Replies
 
vikorr
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2008 06:44 pm
Hi Neologist
Quote:
What a lot of people fail to realize is one huge consequence of the rebellion in Eden has been the temporary delegation of the affairs of this world to the rebel.


Perhaps you will need to expand on how this resulted in the matters being discussed.

Quote:
Recall that Jesus, when tempted by this rebel with all the kingdoms of this world, did not deny that the rebel had the right to offer them. (Matthew 4:9)

In John 14:30, he identified this one as the "ruler of this world."


I know the bible says…yet if Satan is the ruler of this world, how come God kept acting like it was his, destroying stuff here and there (and occasionally everything), ordering people around, setting up laws - and all in someone elses kingdom? Usually that's called any of : invasion, subversion, overthrowing the ruler, dethroning, etc.

Quote:
This rebel is the same "god of this system of things [who] has blinded the minds of the unbelievers. . ." (2Corinthians 4:4)

Those of you who are quick to blame God for the misery in this world should understand that the bible points in a different direction.


Well, I'm not sure if others blame God for the times and places where misery exists in this world. Personally, it's a rather human problem, sometimes contributed to by the natural environment.
.................................................
Hi Arella
Quote:
You know, some of you keep acting like we Christians like the fact that babies were also killed. I highly doubt anyone likes that fact.


Personally I have little doubt you don't like the fact...but you do keep trying to justify it.

Quote:
But, it doesn't matter what we like or not. God had His reasons for it. He's God. We aren't.


You see what I mean?

Quote:
If He wanted to He could wipe this whole world out in a single blink of an eye and there's nothing anyone can do about it.


And yet again?

By the way, he already did that once, according to the bible (though of course, not in the blink of an eye - on that occasion he preferred that everyone drown…but undoubtedly not until after they had all had a few days to flee the rising waters to higher ground, and then probably fight for 10-20 hours for their life, till exhaustion and the waters ended their lives...well, that bit would have occurred after they let go of the millions of babies they would have lovingly been trying to save)

Quote:
Like I said, He gives people chances to repent and turn away from their wickedness. He leaves the decisions in our hands and He makes the consequences very clear.


Once again, this is not true - babies anyone?

And those that did not hear his word (think Noah - he most certainly could not have told every person in the world), and have not heard his word?

Quote:
This life is but a vapor...................spiritual and eternal life are what is important.


Same reasoning suicide bombers use when blowing themselves and others up - it's the afterlife that's important.

This life is so very prescious. We have a chance to love, to express love, and to be loved. We have a chance to grow, to find ourselves, and find and appreciate the beauty inherent in this world, and each and every other person. We hope for peace and joy, and we dance and sing because our hearts soar. We form close bonds with family, friends, and loved ones, and seek bonds with others we don't yet know. Our life evolves and changes from day to day, and we seek, allow, and create happiness for ourselves and others.

This life is incredibly important.
...................
If our life is absolutely worthless, then equality demands that everyone elses life is worthless…so losing their life is meaningless.

To my way of thinking, a terrible tragedy, and an ideology so easily lead, and so easily justifying to evil.
...................

Btw, why do christians strive to improve their lives, and other peoples lives if it's not important?
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2008 06:51 pm
I never said this life was not important. I should have said that our spiritual and eternal life is more important than this physical one. God needs no justification.

God says if you want to know the answer to something ask Him. That's paraphrased but it is in the Bible.
0 Replies
 
vikorr
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2008 07:07 pm
Quote:
I never said this life was not important. I should have said that our spiritual and eternal life is more important than this physical one.


Well, you did say "This life is a vapor", but thank you for the clarification.

Quote:
God needs no justification.


Depends on ones perspective.

If God didn't portray himselve as a God of love, then you would be correct, for these are apparently not of Love (nor forgiveness, hope, or faith).

Further, if God didn't demand or want our love, then you would also be absolutely correct - he could do whatever he liked. Yet we are told that we must love the Lord our God with all our heart and soul.

-Is this possible if he goes around murdering thousands to millions of babies? And does a loving God do so?

-Is it possible to love a God that tells you to do around murdering babies, instead of carrying out the dirtywork himself? Knowing the traumatic effects doing so has on humans, would a loving God tell you to do so?

-Is it possible to love a God who wipes out a nation of people so that his favoured ones can live there instead? And does a loving God do so?

Quote:
God says if you want to know the answer to something ask Him. That's paraphrased but it is in the Bible.


I did mention I question all my beliefs?

(well, I try to...some I have no doubt I wouldn't even know were beliefs until someone else questions them...which is great when they do)
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2008 07:11 pm
My answers aren't going to change no matter how many times you ask the same question or how you rephrase it. If you don't accept it then you don't accept it.
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2008 07:36 pm
kate4christ03 wrote:
Quote:
This is pretty close to what I predicted you would answer.

A quick observation before I continue. In your reply, you refer to God as "he" or "him," which in itself is a human created box to define god. I find this to be very ironic, and yet profoundly related to the question at hand.

The problem I have with your reply is that it is completely based on human resolutions on what god is and does, not logic

sorry it took so long to answer.....Deist i didn't choose from my own opinions what God should look like, act like, and do. I did choose to believe the bible and its description of God. have i struggled with things in the bible (specifically the ot) Yeah, and instead of being closedminded and just going on what others tell me, i have studied scriptures that bother me etc. But what i find ironic is that many in this debate, pick a few scriptures, run with it, rant on God being evil etc and yet when we give evidence supporting a less "evil" action, they choose to ignore it and keep up the rant. That is closeminded and ignorant. Very sheeplike, parroting from websites.
and as for Lot...What are you talking about?
and sin is basically anything that falls short of Gods glory and holiness, doing anything that God said not to do.

Thanks for the reply Kate. I've been at a conference, so I have not had access for a few days.

My next question based on your description of sin is:

"If sin is doing what god commands not to do, does god arbitrarily chose what to command? In short, we know what god commands not to do, but why does god command us in theis specific fashion?"

Additionally, what is the difference in your beliefs between "sin" and "evil."

(other's are encouraged to reply as well.)

T
K
O
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » The KKK are right
  3. » Page 23
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 03/15/2026 at 02:26:20