With A Heavy Heart, I Say This to Atheists and Christians

[David F.]

Thanks, it's very interesting. Unfortunately in David's case it still leads to the same conclusion. He asks for transitionals, new phylums etc, and then says "ha ha ha" when one is provided.

As you'll know, I asked several times for him to classify what he regards and considers as transitional etc, and yet he ignored every single request made. I have the feeling he was just setting it up for himself so he could say "ha ha ha".

As you are fully aware, transitional forms between Phylums, Classes or Orders, just start with one Phylum and end with a different Phylum (Class or Order) - like transition from fish to reptiles or reptiles to mammals, or something to birds. Worms are not transitional forms.

 

[anonymous2]

Right...

Paul (and Peter, and the OT) many times tells women to voluntarily submit to their husbands but NOT ONCE does the bible ever tell a man to force a woman to submit. In the same way, Christians are to voluntarily submit to Christ just as Jesus submitted to the Father.

Yes, David, but this goes back to what freedom really is. Is it really voluntary if you have to do it or the punishment is.. ? What is a wife doing if she's not submitting to her husband? Yes, the husband should love the wife, but what if the husband doesn't? The wife still has to submit to pretty much whatever the husband wants, correct or not? Doesn't the NT also say to submit to even an unreasonable husband? And for slaves to submit to their masters as they'd submit to the Lord, with fear (or respect, depending on the translation I suppose)? For slaves to submit to their masters, even if they're unfair? What more could the state ask for in a book than slavish submission to the state and authority? Submit, submit, submit, in fact, the governments are ordained by God.

Christians aren't to voluntarily submit to Christ. They're to submit to Christ, or suffer the consequences, am I right or not? Doesn't the God of the Bible still have that gun to the head? And you basically admitted to me that this was in fact the God of the Bible, didn't you? Submit or be cast in the lake of fire, right?

 

[SnakeLord]

As you are fully aware, transitional forms between Phylums, Classes or Orders, just start with one Phylum and end with a different Phylum (Class or Order) - like transition from fish to reptiles or reptiles to mammals, or something to birds. Worms are not transitional forms.

I'll take your word for it. I guess you're the worm scientist..

Here

Start there and work through it.

 

[David F.]

I'm aware of this, as it is mentioned almost constantly throughout leviticus and deut. I actually started a big debate about it a long time ago here. But because you and I know that god wants meat/burning meat as sacrifices, how would Cain know? Cain provided what he produced; soil produce. We can hardly blame him that he didn't deal with livestock, nor should we expect him to have gone and killed one of his brothers animals. He made an offer of his produce, but god didn't like it, which is not Cain's fault, now is it?

God does explain his need for meat sacrifice later on in leviticus and deut, but by then it's too late for Cain. Because god threw Cain's offering back in his face. I state that we would all get angry if we gave someone something and they threw it back at us, and had a go at us for offering them something they didn't want. Of course. However, we never have to find that out because Abel was lucky enough to be dealing with livestock as opposed to soil tilling.

God threw Cain's sacrifice back in his face? Please tell how you know this since it is obviously not in Genesis?

It simply says that God showed respect for Abel's sacrifice. Many times in the bible, God shows His respect for a sacrifice by sending fire from heaven to consume the sacrifice. Did this happen here - we don't know. In some way, God made it clear to the brothers which sacrifice was acceptable. Is that an excuse for Cain to get angry - not at all. God did nothing to anger Cain, other than to show pleasure in the deeds of his brother. God even tries to rationally reason with Cain but Cain will have none of it.

Not at all. god could have said: "Well, i'm not a particular fan of fruit, but it's a nice offering nonetheless. For future reference though, when I require more offerings, is it possible for you to just kill a cow for me?"

God did exactly this, by showing preference for one sacrifice over the other. There is nothing in the record which says God showed disfavor toward Cain's sacrifice - only favor/respect toward Abel's. Nothing could be clearer.

The result would have been Cain learning what offerings god 'needs' without any anger forming, or future deaths. That's how a normal parent would do it.

Of course being omniscient he must have known what outcome would arise from his whinging, and he should be smart enough to have figured a better alternative. Why whinge at the human when the human is doing the best he can?

You seem to be trying to say that Cain should be excused for pre-meditated murder? I suppose that since you are angry with me that we should excuse you if you trick me into going out into a field and then strike me down from behind?

 

[c20H25N3o]

Christians aren't to voluntarily submit to Christ. They're to submit to Christ, or suffer the consequences, am I right or not? Doesn't he still have that gun to the head? And you basically admitted to me that this was in fact the God of the Bible, didn't you? Submit or be cast in the lake of fire, right?

Well any submission is voluntary by nature because of our obvious sense of 'free will'. But yes, accept Jesus and receive eternal life in Him or be cast into a lake of fire. That seems to be about it from where I am standing.

Behold! I am the Lord.

I am the Way, The Truth and The Life. No one comes to the Father except through me. Whoever has the Son has the Father also. Whoever does not have the Son does not have The Father.

response by c20: A totally sovreign God does not have to conform to what you want Him to be because He Is Who Is. You my friend (like I) are His creatures. He knows you much much better than you know yourself. He knows every last detail, every hair on your head, every atom in the pupil of your eye by name. He knows your life, your loves and your needs. Given that He is your Heavenly father should you not put your faith in Him?

 

[anonymous2]

Well any submission is voluntary by nature because of our obvious sense of 'free will'. But yes, accept Jesus and receive eternal life in Him or be cast into a lake of fire. That seems to be about it from where I am standing.

Ok, then I guess if I took a gun, and put it to your head, and demanded your wallet or your life, whatever you decide would be voluntary? Could I then go to a court and say that I am guiltless because your decision to give me your wallet was voluntary? You did it out of your free will, didn't you? How is that substantially different than the God of the Bible?

But thank you for admitting as David did, what the God of the Bible seems to be like.

 

[§outh§tar]

I only consider it an expression of your ignorance. No offense. You're arguing from a decidedly Christian perspective, in the first place. If stretched's perspective was any guideline, then what's the difference between taking your enemy's daughter for a wife, selling her to people who have only their own consciences to 'feel accountable to', or letting her die in the desert?

It would also help if you provided references.

You read about the Egyptian man who killed his daughters because he had no sons? They were of no worth to him. Don't underestimate people's interpretation of "freedom", or the limits of your own. It's a gift. All it takes to lose your freedom is one terrorist who has other plans for you. How are you going to persuade him that your interpretation of freedom carries more weight than his?

Paul had a way: he compared our relationship with each other with the relationship Christ has with us, more - and pronounced it binding. To him, it's a matter directly dealing with God. He begins Ephesians 5 with "Be imitators of God". Keeping that in mind, now consider his words: "Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior".

What, then, is the relationship between Christ (the head, "man") with his body (the church, "woman")?

"Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her". He is hardly hoarding himself over her. He goes on: "Husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself." How does a man treat his body - himself? He should treat a woman even better.

Methods of subjugating women?? Try again.

You are off by about a mile. The verse about Christ and the Church had absolutely nothing to do with what I said since I am very aware of it and what it means so I don't know if you are trying to be funny or..

 

[§outh§tar]

By that logic, then as soon as the knife starts slitting the throat of the lamb it becomes blemished and unfit. No, I think we have to examine Jesus at the point before the High Priest's guards took him from the Garden on the Mount of Olives.

I think it is even more important (as you already know - I am preaching to the choir here) to look at the condition of Jesus' soul/spirit and see that it was not blemished by sin. But you were just kidding anyway, weren't you?

Aah yes..

The ever foolish premise that Jesus was sinless just because the Gospel writers said so. But you were just kidding anyway, weren't you?

 

[what768]

Jesus was sinless.

 

[c20H25N3o]

Jesus is sinless

 

[Medicine*Woman]

c20H25N3o: Jesus is sinless
*************
M*W: Of course the Sun-God is sinless!

 

[TruthSeeker]

Yo,

Quote Truthseeker:
"The bible indicates this is the reason we are here, to learn obedience."

Why? To become as slaves? What is it with this gods power frenzy? Isn`t this the dude who wrote our DNA code?

Smooth.

I never said that.

 

[TruthSeeker]

God does not need gifts, but He still asks that we give Him things that are important to us - thus the word sacrifice. It is not for Him, it is for us to prove our loyalty/obedience. After all, the reason Adam got kicked out of the garden was for disobedience. The bible indicates this is the reason we are here, to learn obedience.

We are here to learn how to be like Him.
Sacrifice is pointless if there's no one benefitting from it.

 

[§outh§tar]

Not if you're a suicide bomber.

 

[TruthSeeker]

My point though was why does a Holy Book require such overt arbitrariness? There is simply no evidence whatsoever that God reprimanded Cain of intentions and rather to the contrary because of his actions.

If you analize the criptures by a psychological point of view, you will see just the case of intention. keep reading and I will show you exactly where, once again.

(As a sidenote, if such were the case, then God must have condemned Cain as guilty before he ever actually commited the sin).

Here it is once again:

Genesis 4:6-7
"6 Then the LORD said to Cain, " Why are you angry? And why has your countenance fallen?
7 "If you do well, will not your countenance be lifted up? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must master it."

Cain didn't "do well". God noted that and advied Cain to revert that and master over sin. The sin wasn't to give fruit to God, the sin was Cain killing Abel. You see that God says that sin is "crouching at the door". Sin is developing with Cain, but Cain haven't sinned yet. God warned Cain. He never punihed Cain. Cain punished Himself. Again, in thefollowing veres we read:

Genesis 4:14-15
14 "Behold, You have driven me this day from the face of the ground; and from Your face I will be hidden, and I will be a vagrant and a wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me."
15 So the LORD said to him, "Therefore whoever kills Cain, vengeance will be taken on him sevenfold." And the LORD appointed a sign for Cain, so that no one finding him would slay him. "

See, God didn't punish Cain. He actually protected him. He didn't want sin to spread. If you want to read more about it, read my last post or go to the website I provided (in that last post).

But yeah.... hear God's words in those scriptures. Does it sound like a vengeful God or a God that is actually trying to help Cain?

Christians often accuse critics of taking verses out of context or forcing a negative eisegesis but here it is - (another) unfounded reading of the text.

It is "unfounded" eventough is both in context and analized from a psychological and logical point of view? :bugeye:
Do you want to find the truth, or not?

 

[TruthSeeker]

Not if you're a suicide bomber.

What is the benefit in that?

 

[SnakeLord]

God threw Cain's sacrifice back in his face? Please tell how you know this since it is obviously not in Genesis?

Oh come now, I thought you religious types were good at understanding what should be taken as metaphor and what should be taken literally. You seriously thought I imaged god picking up a banana and slapping Cain around the face with it? Seriously, apply some thinking.

It simply says that God showed respect for Abel's sacrifice.

Yes, and showed no respect to Cain for his offering. What exactly are you trying to argue against? You've already agreed several times that god wants meat/burning meat - and yet there is no reason to say Cain knew any of this, and couldn't have done better considering his job was as a soil tiller.

Of course, with blatant hypocrisy you accuse me of something and then do it three seconds later:

In some way, God made it clear to the brothers which sacrifice was acceptable.

So now I need to repeat your sentence: "Please tell how you know this since it is obviously not in Genesis?"

I doubt, like me, you can state it was a metaphor, so why are you going along this line of serious make-believe? This is what your whole argument comes down to? Fantasy make it up as you go along? What next, a leprechaun sent by god came to Cain and told him to sacrifice a cow instead of offering a plum? Get real.

Worst of all you didn't even manage a full explanation, but could only muster: "in some way".

Don't waste my time with this, please.

God even tries to rationally reason with Cain but Cain will have none of it.

Rationally? There is no "rationally" in having a go at someone for giving you a kiwi fruit instead of a dead goat. Especially when expecting it from a soil tiller.

God did exactly this, by showing preference for one sacrifice over the other. There is nothing in the record which says God showed disfavor toward Cain's sacrifice - only favor/respect toward Abel's. Nothing could be clearer.

Now you're just being plain silly. god had a go at Cain for his offering, and as you've agreed many times now, it's due to god having this serious like for meat as opposed to ground produce. The best you could manage was to say "somehow, wishing on a star, god informed them beforehand", when that is quite clearly ridiculous nonsense - and yet you do not deny the telling off that Cain received for his offering, you just try to dismiss it with make-believe.

You seem to be trying to say that Cain should be excused for pre-meditated murder?

Then you should start reading my post better. There's nothing in my post claiming Cain didn't murder anyone, simply that god could have found a better method by which to tell Cain he prefers meat. I was explaining the difference between a lousy parent and a good one.

I suppose that since you are angry with me that we should excuse you if you trick me into going out into a field and then strike me down from behind?

This question has no worth to anything, and you know it. The issue is not that Cain should be excused, but that god should use his noodle once in a while. There's many times in life when a parent sits down and thinks "hmm, maybe I could have handled that a better way". In this instance, god would be that parent - but he has no excuse seeings as he would have known the outcome before it happened.

Truthseeker:

But yeah.... hear God's words in those scriptures. Does it sound like a vengeful God or a God that is actually trying to help Cain?

Trying to help him? By completely stopping his ability to do his job, which in those days would have been a matter of life and death?

You can read this further on my last post to you, which awaits your attention. Thanks.

 

[what768]

M*W: Of course the Sun-God is sinless!
-
Note that the Sun-God doesn't mean the sun, but it means the maker of the sun.

 

[c20H25N3o]

I think The Sun-God is quite a nice name for God actually. It was nice of Him to make it for us that we may enjoy it's warmth, that we may marvel at it's mystery. I have to wear dark glasses though because the light hurts these eyes that may not look at it directly.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

what768: M*W: Of course the Sun-God is sinless!
-
Note that the Sun-God doesn't mean the sun, but it means the maker of the sun.
*************
M*W: No, you're wrong about that. It literally means the SUN who is the sinless creator. I suggest you read:

Moses and Akhenaten: The Secret History of Egypt at the Time of the Exodus, by Ahmed Osman, 2002.

Lost Secrets of the Sacred Ark, by Laurence Gardner, 2003.

Jesus Christ Sun of God: Ancient Cosmology and Early Christian Symbolism, by David Fideler, 1993.