Questioning the Old Testament, Demiurge, Counsels, etc

originally posted by: dominicus

If you can't read a book, because the cover is red and you don't like that color, well then that's just your problem

I'm sorry you decided to react this way. I had thought you were worth saving. But if this is how you react to some constructive criticism, your ideas will remain in the realm of internet posts of dubious value. Your essay as you presented it is all over the map, very disjointed, and lacking focus. Given how you have presented your ideas, and your defensive reaction, you can't really be taken seriously. You get a "C" for effort, but most people seriously interested in the topic won't put up with such a shoddy attempt. It's mediocre at best.

originally posted by: Akragon

originally posted by: whyamIhere
Like you said there was an agenda.

The Gnostics had great stories of Jesus laughing and being human.

That did not fit the scare the snip out of you agenda of the Counsel.

Technically that isn't true.... read the apocalypse of Peter

Are you afraid of Hell?

You mean in the Scrolls ?

I am still learning trying to gain a better understanding.

I will check it out....Thanks

originally posted by: dominicus

Prove that its hearsay other than just saying that it is. Where's your proof

It's full of outrageous stories, that contradict the nature, science and logic,
That proves it for me.
Btw hearsay is the most polite and forgiving term we can use, for such made up nonsense.

originally posted by: schuyler

originally posted by: dominicus

If you can't read a book, because the cover is red and you don't like that color, well then that's just your problem

I'm sorry you decided to react this way. I had thought you were worth saving. But if this is how you react to some constructive criticism, your ideas will remain in the realm of internet posts of dubious value. Your essay as you presented it is all over the map, very disjointed, and lacking focus. Given how you have presented your ideas, and your defensive reaction, you can't really be taken seriously. You get a "C" for effort, but most people seriously interested in the topic won't put up with such a shoddy attempt. It's mediocre at best.

Did you notice, nobody else on the thread has a problem with the post. What does that say?

a reply to: dominicus

I had no problems reading your opening post, in fact a great synopsis that anyone who has studied highlights and key aspects of theology will find easy to follow.

If you care to share more about what you remember happened between incarnations I would be happy to read.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Oh do tell. Why DID he put entire cities/villages/camps to death other than him not being a bully? I was under the impression that god is supposed to be omnipotent, so it makes me wonder why he had to use indiscriminate methods to kill off large swaths of people instead of selectively killing them with say a disease that only targets the people who defied him or something.

Well, in other parts of the Bible, He does kill individuals...individually. So perhaps God's "indiscriminate methods" *were* discriminate.

Of course I'm also wondering (like the OP brought up about jealousy), why does a god need to feel wrath and anger anyways? Isn't that another human flaw?

Eh, I don't think so. People get mad at the injustice in the world. I've got no problem with that, as long as it is handled rightly.

originally posted by: dominicus
Prove that its hearsay other than just saying that it is. Where's your proof

Most of the Bible is written like history. The difference between history and hearsay is that someone took the time to confirm was true especially before sophisticated archeology got off the ground. And *then* we have to take their word that it was true. (Same is true of journalism.) It's hard to "prove" anything one way or another without hard evidence.

I think that's why he's calling it hearsay. Perhaps you should put forth your case that it is more than "mere" hearsay instead of asking him to prove that it is. (How could you even do that? With stuff like this, rock-solid "proof" is hard to come by. You're prolly better off arguing that it *probably* is not hearsay :up

originally posted by: StalkerSolent

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Oh do tell. Why DID he put entire cities/villages/camps to death other than him not being a bully? I was under the impression that god is supposed to be omnipotent, so it makes me wonder why he had to use indiscriminate methods to kill off large swaths of people instead of selectively killing them with say a disease that only targets the people who defied him or something.

Well, in other parts of the Bible, He does kill individuals...individually. So perhaps God's "indiscriminate methods" *were* discriminate.

Oh please! God killed all the first born Egyptian children during his infamous plagues. Are we to assume that these children DESERVED to die? Sodom and Gomorrah had to have children in the cities, yet they perished there too. Not every family but Noah's had Nephilim children and were wicked.

Here is a link to all of all the people god is responsible for murdering. How many has God killed? Complete list and estimated total (Including Apocryphal killings)

Eh, I don't think so. People get mad at the injustice in the world. I've got no problem with that, as long as it is handled rightly.

Anger/wrath is supposed to be one of the seven deadly sins. And here you are telling me it is ok if it is justified and handled appropriately? That sounds like a rationalization for an inconvenient truth to me.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Oh please! God killed all the first born Egyptian children during his infamous plagues. Are we to assume that these children DESERVED to die? Sodom and Gomorrah had to have children in the cities, yet they perished there too. Not every family but Noah's had Nephilim children and were wicked.

Here is a link to all of all the people god is responsible for murdering. How many has God killed? Complete list and estimated total (Including Apocryphal killings)

Your list is too short. The Bible sorta indicates that human life (and death) is in God's hands, whether it is the death of sparrows or the death of humans. It would seem that every death that happens He either tacitly permits or orchestrates.

On a related note, why is murder wrong? Animals eat each other all the time, but you clearly believe that humans should not kill each other. Why not?

Anger/wrath is supposed to be one of the seven deadly sins. And here you are telling me it is ok if it is justified and handled appropriately? That sounds like a rationalization for an inconvenient truth to me.

Well, the seven deadly sins are more of a Catholic thing, so I can't speak on them that well. ("Seven Deadly Sins" has a nice ring to it, though!) However, I don't think you've taken the time to understand how the Catholics (or any other Christian group, or the Bible) view anger. Now, I'm not Catholic, but if you look up wrath you'll notice that it is differently described than merely being angry. To speak broadly and from my limited knowledge on the topic, Christian theology has historically distinguished between sinful anger and anger that is justified: there is a difference at growing angry for selfish, unjustified reasons, and getting angry because of a grievous breech of justice or other wrongdoing. Which makes perfect sense to me (and apparently Jesus, too...)

originally posted by: StalkerSolent
Your list is too short. The Bible sorta indicates that human life (and death) is in God's hands, whether it is the death of sparrows or the death of humans. It would seem that every death that happens He either tacitly permits or orchestrates.

On a related note, why is murder wrong? Animals eat each other all the time, but you clearly believe that humans should not kill each other. Why not?

Because I think the idea of do unto others is a good idea. Yes, I know it is from the bible. No, that doesn't mean I agree with the rest of it.

Well, the seven deadly sins are more of a Catholic thing, so I can't speak on them that well. ("Seven Deadly Sins" has a nice ring to it, though!) However, I don't think you've taken the time to understand how the Catholics (or any other Christian group, or the Bible) view anger. Now, I'm not Catholic, but if you look up wrath you'll notice that it is differently described than merely being angry. To speak broadly and from my limited knowledge on the topic, Christian theology has historically distinguished between sinful anger and anger that is justified: there is a difference at growing angry for selfish, unjustified reasons, and getting angry because of a grievous breech of justice or other wrongdoing. Which makes perfect sense to me (and apparently Jesus, too...)

Of course there is a difference in Christians' eyes, how else would Christians have been able to justify all their hate and intolerance throughout the ages? For the record, I am an ex-Catholic. I see these same rationalizations when I point out that worshiping a cross or worshiping a statue of Mary is idolatry, but I'm sure you will be quick to point out the clever distinction Christians have come up with that makes that not the case.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Because I think the idea of do unto others is a good idea. Yes, I know it is from the bible. No, that doesn't mean I agree with the rest of it.

So... under what circumstances should God let someone die?

Of course there is a difference in Christians' eyes, how else would Christians have been able to justify all their hate and intolerance throughout the ages? For the record, I am an ex-Catholic. I see these same rationalizations when I point out that worshiping a cross or worshiping a statue of Mary is idolatry, but I'm sure you will be quick to point out the clever distinction Christians have come up with that makes that not the case.

Um...not being Catholic, I don't mind your interpretation of worshipping Mary.
And I have no desire to justify the very real and very ugly hate and such Christians sometimes spew. I simply think that being angry at injustices is perfectly reasonable (and within the bounds of scripture.)

I agree with you op, as i too remember before being born, and i too was in a black prison like place. Then thrown into a womb. However as you have found cognative dissanance runs amuck and when and if a person truly wants to open their eyes, they shall. The reason i posted was not to be obvious of the red herring posters, or attacks, no i give you props per se as to actually reading the bible and coming to your own educated conclusions, .i.e., the same as mine. The question i have often wondered was to not look into the light, and run like hell. Or give it another chance, kinda like trying to hit the power ball...

originally posted by: StalkerSolent

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Because I think the idea of do unto others is a good idea. Yes, I know it is from the bible. No, that doesn't mean I agree with the rest of it.

So... under what circumstances should God let someone die?

Not for me to determine. I'm not trying to rationalize your god for you.

Of course there is a difference in Christians' eyes, how else would Christians have been able to justify all their hate and intolerance throughout the ages? For the record, I am an ex-Catholic. I see these same rationalizations when I point out that worshiping a cross or worshiping a statue of Mary is idolatry, but I'm sure you will be quick to point out the clever distinction Christians have come up with that makes that not the case.

Um...not being Catholic, I don't mind your interpretation of worshipping Mary.
And I have no desire to justify the very real and very ugly hate and such Christians sometimes spew. I simply think that being angry at injustices is perfectly reasonable (and within the bounds of scripture.)

Then you should be angry at the injustice of bad education.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Not for me to determine. I'm not trying to rationalize your god for you.

I just wondered how you thought God should act.

Then you should be angry at the injustice of bad education.

Possibly so, though perhaps not for the reasons you think

originally posted by: StalkerSolent

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Not for me to determine. I'm not trying to rationalize your god for you.

I just wondered how you thought God should act.

Most likely, hands off, working through the established laws of the universe. Ambivalence

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: StalkerSolent

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Not for me to determine. I'm not trying to rationalize your god for you.

I just wondered how you thought God should act.

Most likely, hands off, working through the established laws of the universe. Ambivalence

Right, but even under that idea, since God created the laws of the universe, He's still responsible for an awful lot of death.

(My view of how God generally acts is actually pretty similar, except for the ambivalent part.)

The Torah (first 5 books) were probably composed by Jewish priests during the 70 years captivity in Babylon (586-516 BC) from some tribal tales, crude scrolls, and other culture's myths to create a new religion with unique ceremonies to unify the Hebrews; true history was unknown to them and truth itself was not important to them (Ref Youtube's "National Geographic the Bible's Buried Secrets Documentary"). The rest of the Tanakh (OT) gets better as time goes by but "editing" was applied then as now by the government/MSM. I'm convinced God gave Hebrew prophets information about a teacher and Savior for the whole World who would be born in Israel: Jesus of the NT (and the NT is not perfect either: Ref Youtube's "Christian Dilemmas: The Untold Story of Biblical Conflict"). NT theology goes over my head; but, all the Gospel stories of Jesus' death and resurrection fit the physical evidence of the Holy Shroud in Turin 100% (the Middle Ages Carbon-14 date is false because the British Museum officials wanted it wrong). I'm convinced that Jesus alone has been empowered by God to write the names of obedient humans into the Lamb's Book of Life and grant them residence in the Kingdom of God (God's Home: Heaven). Please watch Youtube's "#1 Best Videos of Encounter with Jesus Angels Healing Heaven and Hell" and the NT will "come alive" for you. For questions, Jesus said: "Ask and it shall be given "(Matt 7:7).

a reply to: dominicus

If there is one teaching from any 'monotheist' religion that is obviously faux, it would be 'Believe in ???, Dont doubt, and You will go to Heaven after death'

And yet so many 'religious' people are still dwelling on this planet, whining about their sufferings.
i mean, if you know you will go to Heaven after death, why worry at all?

peace

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: StalkerSolent

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Not for me to determine. I'm not trying to rationalize your god for you.

I just wondered how you thought God should act.

Most likely, hands off, working through the established laws of the universe. Ambivalence

My unusual take on all this, is that everything here, is a reflection of everywhere else, the laws that are running, NOW, are exactly how they should be, and no God exists as originally either.

If one looks carefully, they will see that the supposed TPB, as such are ALL following the OT, and doing the things to ensure they remain this way, ultimately forever.

It does not and should not surprise anyone, that at the highest levels, they know why things are so very wrong, and are too scared to do anything about it, or unable to.

Anytime one believes that the laws of the Universe have some sort of actual purpose, they are always falling for what may not be true, it COULD JUST BE, that things have morphed far from anything rational, something so damaged, that it cannot even be destroyed.

a reply to: whyamIhere

Where can I find these stories in particular?