Christianity as the message of love
- Thread starter water
- Start date
oh, no, they started typing in tongues.
where did I say I'd never heard of him, I said the man was pilark and has always been, he does'nt know his arse from his elbow.woody said:
if he spoke to a billion, he would not stop him being a pilark.
no I take the view that no religious person has free will, I have free will, I have no god overseeing what I do, if you tow the line then you have no real free will.woody said:
my label is an atheist and humanist, I'm not armenian, calvinist, moonie.
well good for you, however as I've said if you use he account in the bible, I believe you cant hold adam and eve responible.woody said:
this is where they would win in my view, it's better to have the choice, after death of heaven or hell than not, else it negates free will.woody said:
(not that, I have any believe in an afterlife.)
I've not once said that they were mentally incompetent, babies or toddlers yes.woody said:
your billy graham made one remark, that suits better, they were puppets.
it is always best to get everybodys view of things, and make up you own mind, to whats right for you.woody said:
water's saying the i believe " the voice of reason keeps silent
and woody's saying "love is still love if all else fails"
it's not exactly gibberish.
ay slang :hatway hetay uckfay reray heytay rytaying otay aysay.
back slang:tahw eht kcuf era yeht gniyrt ot yas.
and woody's saying "love is still love if all else fails"
it's not exactly gibberish.
ay slang :hatway hetay uckfay reray heytay rytaying otay aysay.
back slang:tahw eht kcuf era yeht gniyrt ot yas.
Audible,
You are right about one thing, I do not have a free will (at least in my opinion). Arminians tell me differently. If I were Adam in the garden of Eden I would have cut down the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. God did not say Adam couldn't cut it down.
So with your line of reasoning, you can only know evil from good by trying it. Consider this:
And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil.
In your opinion, did God learn evil from good by his own personal experience?
We have not considered the real character to blame for the temptation of A&E -- that is satan:
Rev12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
God did not create Satan, rather he created Lucifer, who became Satan by his own free will:
Isaiah 14
12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations
13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.!
Jesus was there when it happened,because he said in Luke 10:
18 And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.
Proverbs 16:18 sums up the Devil's error:
Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.
He assumed like many of us, that he could be God. Like many of us he ignores the fact that he was a created being, and that God is the engineer and architect of the design. In the end satan, by choice becomes like a Frankenstein monster and turns on his own creator.
There is one very important point you have overlooked -- if you want your free will you give up the option of not having it, and thereby you must live by the consequences forever. If you think you are smarter and higher than the creator, as satan did, a big fall is coming. Satan did not have the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, only a prideful spirit that said -- "I'll be the one in charge around here."
You are right about one thing, I do not have a free will (at least in my opinion). Arminians tell me differently. If I were Adam in the garden of Eden I would have cut down the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. God did not say Adam couldn't cut it down.
So with your line of reasoning, you can only know evil from good by trying it. Consider this:
And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil.
In your opinion, did God learn evil from good by his own personal experience?
We have not considered the real character to blame for the temptation of A&E -- that is satan:
Rev12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
God did not create Satan, rather he created Lucifer, who became Satan by his own free will:
Isaiah 14
12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations
13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.!
Jesus was there when it happened,because he said in Luke 10:
18 And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.
Proverbs 16:18 sums up the Devil's error:
Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.
He assumed like many of us, that he could be God. Like many of us he ignores the fact that he was a created being, and that God is the engineer and architect of the design. In the end satan, by choice becomes like a Frankenstein monster and turns on his own creator.
There is one very important point you have overlooked -- if you want your free will you give up the option of not having it, and thereby you must live by the consequences forever. If you think you are smarter and higher than the creator, as satan did, a big fall is coming. Satan did not have the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, only a prideful spirit that said -- "I'll be the one in charge around here."
Medicine Woman, I've been looking at your posts, and although they do raise some good points, they are also terribly violent toward anyone else with different views from the ones you have.
I am aware I've spoken my own share of anger and/or sadism in these forums; I give Christ a bad name sometimes. But I am still young in my faith. I don't know what you consider yourself (in terms of your philosophy), but the way you speak makes that philosophy look bad.
Just thought you ought to know.
I am aware I've spoken my own share of anger and/or sadism in these forums; I give Christ a bad name sometimes. But I am still young in my faith. I don't know what you consider yourself (in terms of your philosophy), but the way you speak makes that philosophy look bad.
Just thought you ought to know.
spidergoat: oh, no, they started typing in tongues.
*************
M*W: Yeah, it's called "automatic writing," and it's a method of occult transcription from dead spirits and demons.
*************
M*W: Yeah, it's called "automatic writing," and it's a method of occult transcription from dead spirits and demons.
SnakeLord, we've had this discussion a few times before. Are you looking for different answers than the ones I gave you? I said before:SnakeLord said:
"Good" is a normative judgment. The moment the norm (or measure) was established (God's command not to eat from the tree), the normative judgment was possible. The positive is what is left after the negative had been determined.
The fact that God even gives them a commandment presupposes moral discernment. The account contains all we need to know within its own boundaries. Comparing Adam and Eve with immoral animals goes beyond those boundaries, since within it they show recognizably human intelligence (naming the animals and conversing with God) and understanding of what was required of them (Eve being able to repeat God's warning to the serpent). It was God's word against the serpent's, true enough -- and that's part of why the story is told: sin is believing something else over and against God, out of a combination of desire, temptation and disobedience. What we have in Adam and Eve is a representative sample of what sin looks like.The "good and evil" borne by the tree does not simply refer to some critical level of normative knowledge that would be required to understand God's commandments, but to the act of assigning such authority to something foreign (the serpent, in this case) or ourselves (Adam and Eve), as if their or our words bore equal weight with God's. Neither they not the serpent could claim such moral or legal independence from God, and assuming it, results in guilt, shame, and punishment. Consequently, God promises the Holy Land to "children who do not yet know good from evil", and not to those who disobeyed Him with knowledge (Deut. 1:39).
If you read the Biblical texts, you'll see God didn't hold anything against Cain, nor did He see Cain's offering as a "waste of time", instead:
Gen.4:6-7 ...the LORD said to Cain, 'Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it.
This is the opposite of "having a go at him". God had simply made His decision, and Cain had to wait his turn. But it wasn't good enough for Cain. His jealousy consumed him, and it consumed Abel. Like Adam and Eve, like Satan himself, he reacted to God's sovereignity with rebellion and disobedience.1 John 3:12 Do not be like Cain, who belonged to the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his own actions were evil and his brother's were righteous.
As we understand from Genesis, nothing may challenge God's sovereignity. God is more than allowed to choose. Taking the resentment we feel towards God out on people, is nothing less than bitter selfishness, taking the way of Cain which ultimately reaps the same results (Matthew 5:21-22).
Last edited:
Truth51: Medicine Woman, I've been looking at your posts, and although they do raise some good points, they are also terribly violent toward anyone else with different views from the ones you have.
*************
M*W: Thanks for your comments. It is not my intention nor practice to be verbally violent toward any religion with the exception of christianity, and I'll tell you why. From history and from personal experience, I believe christianity is the greatest evil in this world. It has the power to take your mind away, and you become a blood-sucking zombie. I don't oppose 'different views,' I listen and read. I don't know enough about other religions to challenge them, but I'm still learning. With christians, you can't just quietly and politely say, "I'm concerned about your spiritual welfare." You have to slap them in the face with reality, in this case, a cyber-slap. You have to rile them up and get their blood fuming. You have to hit them in the gut until they fall down, and you have to keep repeating this until they are willing to hear you. Even then, there are those who are so totally brainwashed that they won't listen. Those who do listen start to see and understand their entrapment. My mother always said, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." I just want to lead them to the water, and when they're ready, they will drink. For some, it may take years. It took years for me to realize the futility of my christian belief system. Another saying my mother had was something like, "If you want to get the mule's attention, you've got to knock him over the head." That's how it is with christians. Their focus is misdirected, and they are misguided. I say, "Hit 'em over the head, bring 'em to the water, and then they'll drink." It may take years, but it may take days. The point is to not give up.
*************
Truth51: I am aware I've spoken my own share of anger and/or sadism in these forums; I give Christ a bad name sometimes. But I am still young in my faith. I don't know what you consider yourself (in terms of your philosophy), but the way you speak makes that philosophy look bad.
Just thought you ought to know.
*************
M*W: First of all, my 'philosophy' is that I am an anti-christian. I feel the need to be more than just an ex-xian. Otherwise, my plight would have been for naught. I came to sciforums as a believer in god but not in the dying demigod savior concept. I lost that when I was in pagan St. Peter's. But I believed in a creator, and by damn, I had the philosophy to stand by my theistic belief. After I'd been on sciforums for about a year, it became clear to me that there couldn't possibly be a god, and then I became an atheist. I am grateful to sciforums members who guided me to the light. Since I've been here, I've seen others find the truth, too. I may be radical in my approach, but you'd be shocked at the numbers of PMs I get from other members and even people from all over the world who may not be members, telling me that I gave them insight into their religous questions. There may be a few christians on the forum who hate me and try to discredit me. That's okay, because I know I've hit a sore spot within them, and that's just the beginning of their journey into 'recovery,' because christianity, like most religions, is an addiction.
*************
M*W: Thanks for your comments. It is not my intention nor practice to be verbally violent toward any religion with the exception of christianity, and I'll tell you why. From history and from personal experience, I believe christianity is the greatest evil in this world. It has the power to take your mind away, and you become a blood-sucking zombie. I don't oppose 'different views,' I listen and read. I don't know enough about other religions to challenge them, but I'm still learning. With christians, you can't just quietly and politely say, "I'm concerned about your spiritual welfare." You have to slap them in the face with reality, in this case, a cyber-slap. You have to rile them up and get their blood fuming. You have to hit them in the gut until they fall down, and you have to keep repeating this until they are willing to hear you. Even then, there are those who are so totally brainwashed that they won't listen. Those who do listen start to see and understand their entrapment. My mother always said, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." I just want to lead them to the water, and when they're ready, they will drink. For some, it may take years. It took years for me to realize the futility of my christian belief system. Another saying my mother had was something like, "If you want to get the mule's attention, you've got to knock him over the head." That's how it is with christians. Their focus is misdirected, and they are misguided. I say, "Hit 'em over the head, bring 'em to the water, and then they'll drink." It may take years, but it may take days. The point is to not give up.
*************
Truth51: I am aware I've spoken my own share of anger and/or sadism in these forums; I give Christ a bad name sometimes. But I am still young in my faith. I don't know what you consider yourself (in terms of your philosophy), but the way you speak makes that philosophy look bad.
Just thought you ought to know.
*************
M*W: First of all, my 'philosophy' is that I am an anti-christian. I feel the need to be more than just an ex-xian. Otherwise, my plight would have been for naught. I came to sciforums as a believer in god but not in the dying demigod savior concept. I lost that when I was in pagan St. Peter's. But I believed in a creator, and by damn, I had the philosophy to stand by my theistic belief. After I'd been on sciforums for about a year, it became clear to me that there couldn't possibly be a god, and then I became an atheist. I am grateful to sciforums members who guided me to the light. Since I've been here, I've seen others find the truth, too. I may be radical in my approach, but you'd be shocked at the numbers of PMs I get from other members and even people from all over the world who may not be members, telling me that I gave them insight into their religous questions. There may be a few christians on the forum who hate me and try to discredit me. That's okay, because I know I've hit a sore spot within them, and that's just the beginning of their journey into 'recovery,' because christianity, like most religions, is an addiction.
mis-t-highs said:
I am giving hints that this very thread is an example of how some people violently go against Christianity and love.
I think that the popular belief that "Christianity is the religion of love" is something that needs a lot of elaboration -- hence this thread.
The elaboration in the sense of explaining what that love is about and what Christianity is about.
And esp. pointing out such strawman arguments like "If Christinaity is the religion of love, then why did they kill so many people in the name of God?! Some love!" or when Christians are sometimes told to "Turn the other cheek no matter what, bever defend themselves -- for it would not be love if they would".
Christians are sometimes downright expected to go for the "Golden Retriever Syndrome" (after the nice dog who greets a burglar and expects the burglar to pet him) -- and if they aren't that way, they are accused of not complying with the commandments of their faith.
SouthStar,
Die Stimme der Vernunft ist leise. -- The voice of reason/sanity/wisdom ("Vernunft" is hard to tranlate into English) is silent, never loud.
That goes for all the bashing going on in this thread.
Medicine Woman said:
What is right/wrong for you doesn't have to be right/wrong for others. There are no absolutes. All people are different, there are different "Christians", and you haven't experienced all their views. There are many people who call themselves "believers", but because of their own stupidity they create evil with their belief. They aren't "believers". If they would believe in God, they would do the same things that God does - loveful things. I'm not talking about YOUR personal evil "God"!
Good and evil has its birth in the human mind. A book, like the Bible could never be good or evil, it is only what you think of it. Of course, even if this would be 1000 times more Right, it doesn't have to be right for you. All people must still gain experience through their mistakes.
Medicine Woman said:
Really?
That reading a book or listening to some people should have such an effect on you -- to become a "blood-sucking zombie"? Or do you believe in voodoo?
Then what does this say about YOU, if you can be corrupted so easily?!
And WHO ARE YOU that you think you have the right to impose yourself into other people's lives that way?!
Exactly. It is the futility of YOUR Christian belief system.
It is YOUR understanding of Chrstianity that was flawed, insufficient, marred by bad personal experience.
But now you are acting like a god, doing as if you knew what Chrstianity truly is about -- when all YOU know is YOUR experience of Christianity. And this is not the only experience of Christianity there is.
How appropriate my name is ...
Sure, because your 'answer' doesn't have any weight to it.
Hate to say it, but this is nonsensical garbage and nothing more. However, let's look at the rest of your post:
Not at all. We often, as parents, tell our very young children not to do something that they would have no way of understanding. If a 3 month old child were to stick it's fingers in the plug socket, the parent would say "Nooooo don't do that", but the child wouldn't understand what the parent was saying. It wouldn't in any way make the child sticking his fingers in the plug socket any different or stop him doing it later. Telling our child not to do it in no way means he/she can understand it.
Animals? No.. Children? Yes.
Children can talk long before they can properly understand 'right' and 'wrong', or the outcome of doing something that an adult would consider 'wrong'. You cannot try and dismiss it, and claim they understood merely on the basis that they could talk, name animals, or repeat what someone else has said. What was said to them is still overly meaningless if there is no valid reason to listen to one over the other, (god/snake) - of which there is no justifiable reason to state that they did. Not to mention that the snake was in fact right, whereas god was wrong. They didn't die that day as god had told them, and did in actuality become "like gods", which is clearly attested to by god. Let's look at it:
"god knows in fact that the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods, knowing good from evil" --- the snake talking
The bible confirms this just after with:
'So she took some of its fruit and ate it. She also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate it. Then the eyes of both of them were opened..' --- As you can see, the act confirmed the snake's claims.
Further on god also confirms it:
"Now that man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil.." -- as clearly seen, god confirms the snake's claims. Man had become like 'the gods'.
You really have very little to argue against. The snake makes a claim, and both the bible and god attest to it.
Before eating the fruit, they were not like gods, and had no knowledge of good and evil - and as such, until having eaten the fruit, did not have the ability to understand the moral implications that would have gone with it.
Your only argument against this is that they must have known because they were able to talk and name animals. That's not even worth the kilobytes it's using.
Strange you missed out a part. Let me point it out to you:
Cain was a farmer, (soil produce), while Abel was a shepherd, (4:2). After some time, Cain bought an offering, or gift, to present to god. Abel did the same. (4:3)
'yahweh looked with favour on Abel and his offering. But he did not look with favour on Cain and his offering'.
The bible clearly shows that the issue here was with the offering given, not with any sins committed, or bad action on Cain's part. Simply put, Cain offered a gift to god that god didn't want. As I've said before, the dude doesn't like fruit.
He then "had a go" at Cain because his offering was not to gods liking. gods speech would have some merit if Cain had actually sinned, but he hadn't - (of course what Cain didn't know, but what we know now, is that offering fruit is actually a sin).
As a result, being a farmer is a complete waste of time. god could have told Cain not to waste his time picking fruits because god doesn't like fruits - and instead he should follow in his younger brother's footsteps and kill lambs.
But through all of this, there is no sign of a sin committed on Cain's part, until after god has a go at him. And the reason god has a go at Cain is clearly because his offering was not good enough.
Sorry, you've lost me.. wait his turn on what? What decision? What?
His own actions were evil? Offering fruit? There's the very point you see. Even john shows that there's a distinct evilness with offering fruit to god. But how would Cain know god doesn't like bananas?
Nonsense, seemingly even a snake can get the better of god, god just does the cursing afterwards. Even the lowest scum on earth know how to curse others, in fact it's what they excel at.
Sure, but then isn't it funny how he always apparently chooses to let others out-do him just so he can cause the mayhem afterwards?
Sure, but as I said, Cain wasn't in the position to take his resentment out on the guy hiding in the clouds. Abel became the fall guy, and as tragic as that is, it could easily have been avoided if only god decided fruit wasn't all that bad. I guess he was just still feeling bitter about the Garden of Eden episode.
Summary:
Your entire counter argument for the Adam and Eve account is that they must have known because they were able to talk, and your counter argument for the Cain account is by missing most of the relevant text while not being able to point out what sin Cain had committed to get god pissed off in the first place.
Your 'answers' have no merit.
it would have been better if god had'nt put it there in the first place.woody said:
no I have not said that, and I dont thing I even implied itwoody said:
this has been said and repeated many times, there are over 650 bad things in the bible either directly on indirectly done by god, and only just over 50 accredited to satan. the devil does get a very bad press.( incidently I have no believe in god/gods devil or demons)woody said:
this make no sense!woody said:
I knelt and prayed for 20 years, then I realised I was talking to myself. so I am higher then anythings thats non-existent as I exist.woody said:
I am the one in charge of my life, I have no fear of I do not cower to a invisible non-existent entitywoody said:
Snakelord,
It's not what A&E gained at the garden of Eden, rather it is what they lost.
Well, they had eternal life as far as we know before the transgression (the same as gods).
They could talk to animals and vice versa before the transgression.
They had it made in a paradise lifestyle.
Look what they got from eating the fruit:
Eve is given pain in childbirth.
Adam has to earn a living by the sweat of his brow.
They both started aging and eventually die.
That's a pretty high price to pay to find out what it means to be "wrong." Nobody wants to be wrong. yet that's the hard knock that Adam and Eve took, not just for themselves, but for all humanity. We still have pain in childbirth, I still sweat for a living, and everyone still dies.
It's not what A&E gained at the garden of Eden, rather it is what they lost.
Well, they had eternal life as far as we know before the transgression (the same as gods).
They could talk to animals and vice versa before the transgression.
They had it made in a paradise lifestyle.
Look what they got from eating the fruit:
Eve is given pain in childbirth.
Adam has to earn a living by the sweat of his brow.
They both started aging and eventually die.
That's a pretty high price to pay to find out what it means to be "wrong." Nobody wants to be wrong. yet that's the hard knock that Adam and Eve took, not just for themselves, but for all humanity. We still have pain in childbirth, I still sweat for a living, and everyone still dies.
Ok, let's explore that for a moment..
The biblical text does not support this claim. god goes on to say: ".. he must not be allowed to to reach out his hand and pick from the tree of life too, and eat and live for ever!"
So god kicked them out specifically so they would not get eternal life, which negates a claim stating that they had eternal life at any time during their stay in Eden.
I am curious to see how you can support a claim that they did have eternal life. You state that: "as far as we know". I would like to ask who the 'we' refers to, and how they come to that conclusion.
I can't find any textual support for this, (other than the snake who most would claim wasn't an animal, but was satan - in which case, it would be an angel they were conversing with. Ok, so according to christians, he wouldn't have been a very nice angel, (fallen), but an angel nonetheless. As a result, they wouldn't have been talking to an animal.
They had made what?
Let's not fool ourselves, man was put there to be a gardener, not to live in a life of luxury. And for what purpose? You claim they had eternal life, in which case they would be gardeners forever, not witnessing anything die, (and thus not being able to eat meat - removing any reason to have incisor teeth), no kids, no knowledge, and no worthwhile future.
Maybe it's just me, but what is the value of that? It's like being in a prison cell that's nicely decorated. You're still not gonna get anywhere no matter how nice it looks.
Seriously Woody, what is the purpose for two individiuals to spend eternity as gardeners? What benefit does it give them or god?
Or, as the text would support, they didn't have eternal life - and thus would eventually die having spent their entire lives as god's gardeners. Again, what benefit is there for them or god?
True, but then humans have stepped above god, and removed the pain with drugs. His curse is getting closer to completely meaningless.
And funnily enough, you can learn that a bit of excercise and hard work is actually good for you and makes you live longer.
Of course, god's curse more involved the ground not providing it's crops - but that has been negated thanks to fertilisers and gained understanding of how to cultivate land. This doesn't generally apply to the poor Africans, or Middle Eastern people who do face the problems god speaks of here. Their land wont produce crops, but that is down to weather issues mainly, and if it's down to god's curse instead, then it obviously doesn't affect anyone on this side of the planet. We now spend our time and money trying to help those that are still affected by god's curse.
They would have done so anyway, and you can show nothing to support the claim that they wouldn't.
Hard knock? No. If it wasn't for them eating the apple, they'd still be gardening, and none of us would be here now.
A) My wife had it relatively pain free both times, and medicine is only improving..
B) I don't sweat for a living, instead I sweat for fun when I'm not working, as do the countless millions who enjoy football, tennis, jogging, weight lifting, canooing, and sitting in a sauna.
C) Yes we all die. However, if you do some research, you will find one truth: Life expectancy is rising. From 30 years, to 40, to 50, and now?
Medicine is getting better, god created diseases are being exterminated, the poor are being educated and fed thanks to the caring of others, and in general life is improving all around, (except for the religious groups who go round annihilating any humans who disagree with them).
If you looked at a chart showing the life expectancy growth, you'll know that given time that figure will just keep getting higher. Life wont ever be eternal, but no man in his right mind would wish for eternal life. Any rational person would admit it would get somewhat boring after 50,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years. There would simply be nothing left to do or see or say.
If heaven gave eternal life, then heaven would eventually be hell.
All of this aside, I still see nothing to show that Adam and Eve are in any way responsible, or understood that they were doing anything 'wrong' by eating the fruit. Nor do I see any justification for god busting Cain's balls over his offering. All in all you should be thankful to the snake, for it was he who gave you the chance of life.
Last edited: