It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

GOD is Ultimately Responsible For All Evil - But The Big Picture is Based on LOVE.

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2017 @ 06:12 PM
link   
a reply to: muzzleflash

Let me throw out a scenario for you. You chose all that would happen to you in this life. God is the conglomerate consciousness. You are a part of that conglomerate, so yes, God did decide what good and evil would happen in this life for you and for everyone.

Understanding the reason for life is important in accepting the omnipotence and righteousness of God. The reason for life is to experience the self.

Jaden




posted on May, 23 2017 @ 08:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gargoyle91
a reply to: carewemust



ISIS I killing in the name of their beliefs


Abu Bakr has not received any kind of Divine Sanction for his war. Samson killed a thousand men with the jawbone of an ass in the Old Testament. An army that carried the Ark of the Covenant could not be defeated in the Old Testament.

Abu-Bakr and ISIS's failed assault proves their lack of Divine Sanction. An army supported by God CANNOT be defeated.



posted on May, 23 2017 @ 08:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Miracula2

That post didn't say that they killed with devine sanction it said they did it in the name of their beliefs.



posted on May, 23 2017 @ 09:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Miracula2

originally posted by: Gargoyle91
a reply to: carewemust



ISIS I killing in the name of their beliefs


Abu Bakr has not received any kind of Divine Sanction for his war. Samson killed a thousand men with the jawbone of an ass in the Old Testament. An army that carried the Ark of the Covenant could not be defeated in the Old Testament.

Abu-Bakr and ISIS's failed assault proves their lack of Divine Sanction. An army supported by God CANNOT be defeated.


Yeah but
Israel was ultimately defeated because they failed to obey God, the Ark was irrelevant because of sin
You are comparing old testament religion to modern day, it does not work
God does not honor armies. God honors love



posted on May, 23 2017 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Gargoyle91

Oh yes we can call them evil
Killing people outside of justice is evil.

Hence a judge and jury of peers



posted on May, 23 2017 @ 10:07 PM
link   
If we factor in the God allows evil equation, that death is not a bad thing then it gets a little better.

This side of death is filled with wicked injustice where evil reigns and the innocent get screwed.

That’s just empirical reality of this dimension

God admits this world is evil

But then he promises to straighten things out

I believe that.



posted on May, 23 2017 @ 10:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Raggedyman

It doesn't matter who the message was directed to. The context is sacrifices and it calls for the first born to be given unto god.

You asked where god made people sacrifice children. I pointed out that verse as a good contender. Pretty simple.


Sorry got it now, good contender, fair point

How about these that call child sacrifice "abominable thing that the Lord hates"

Deuteronomy 18:10 ESV

There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer

2 Kings 21:6 ESV
And he burned his son as an offering and used fortune-telling and omens and dealt with mediums and with necromancers. He did much evil in the sight of the Lord, provoking him to anger.

Leviticus 18:21 ESV

You shall not give any of your children to offer them to Molech, and so profane the name of your God: I am the Lord.

Jeremiah 7:31 ESV

And they have built the high places of Topheth, which is in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, which I did not command, nor did it come into my mind.

John 3:16 ESV

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

Deuteronomy 12:31 ESV

You shall not worship the Lord your God in that way, for every abominable thing that the Lord hates they have done for their gods, for they even burn their sons and their daughters in the fire to their gods.

Psalm 106:37-41 ESV

They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to the demons; they poured out innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, and the land was polluted with blood. Thus they became unclean by their acts, and played the whore in their deeds. Then the anger of the Lord was kindled against his people, and he abhorred his heritage; he gave them into the hand of the nations, so that those who hated them ruled over them.


And what?
EXODUS 22/29
The bible is not a little golden book, you cant read it like....
Read it how you want, but please dont go preaching it, you have no clue at all, your ignorance is horrific
I bet you went to church as a kid and was a good little christian like so many others around here, then read something and though, little golden book thoughts

EXODUS 22:29

In addition to the incident with Isaac, Barker cited Exodus 22:29 as an example of God accepting human sacrifice. In godless, he quoted this verse on page 240: “For thou shalt not delay to offer the first of thy ripe fruits, and of thy liquors; the firstborn of thy sons shalt thou give unto me.” With all due respect to Barker, either he has intentionally misled the reader by citing this verse, or he is unaware of its true meaning. Based on his background of Bible study and his claims of biblical knowledge, the former, unfortunately, seems to be the case.

Exodus 22:29 was never intended to mean that the Israelites were supposed to sacrifice their firstborn sons to God. In fact, Exodus 13:13 says, “And all the firstborn of man among your sons you shall redeem.” What did it mean to redeem the firstborn son? It meant that the Israelites were to give to the Lord five skekels of silver when the firstborn son was one month old (see Numbers 18:16). What was the purpose of redeeming the firstborn son? Moses explained that it was a memorial of the process by which God delivered the Israelites from Egyptian bondage (Exodus 13:14-15). It is inexcusably poor scholarship for any person who has read the book of Exodus to make such an uninformed statement as to demand that Exodus 22:29 speaks of human sacrifice. We should remember, however, that Barker has admitted his belief that honesty is not always the best tactic for dealing with Christianity or the Bible (Butt, 2003).
www.apologeticspress.org...

But why not, just take a few words out of context



posted on May, 23 2017 @ 10:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

I've seen those but most say he is against people sacrificing them to other gods. Seem perfectly possible that it was part of the religion at one point and then it was taken out.

Also read the redeeming thing, what happens if you don't have five skekles?

Seems like someone in the early church found a way to change the sacrificed firstborns into money for the church since burnt firstborns don't fill the church's coffers.


But why not, just take a few words out of context

Context is formed by the words around the phrase in question not in other chapters or books. The context is clearly about sacrifices. They didn't even bother to make it separate sentences.
edit on 23-5-2017 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2017 @ 10:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Raggedyman

I've seen those but most say he is against people sacrificing them to other gods. Seem perfectly possible that it was part of the religion at one point and then it was taken out.

Also read the redeeming thing, what happens if you don't have five skekles?

Seems like someone in the early church found a way to change the sacrificed firstborns into money for the church since burnt firstborns don't fill the church's coffers.


But why not, just take a few words out of context


Context is formed by the words around the phrase in question not in other chapters or books. The context is clearly about sacrifices. They didn't even bother to make it separate sentences.


It hurts my brain


Please tell me Das, you were never a christian and you have no idea about what its all about
That you are asking questions and not making inane uneducated statements like you know anything

Yes offerings were always made for first born sons, even Christs parents offered the sacrifice
They didnt have 5 Shekels so they offered two pigeons

But what hurts my brain is you are lost, find context in a few words and ignore the rest of the book, that you think God likes child sacrifice when I have only shown a few of the many verses where God call for love over sacrifice.

God states He wants love over tithe, charity over piousness

Anyway, you want to believe God wants child sacrifice, fine.
You decide, you make up your mind, you think how you want

Evidently child sacrifice was that common in Israel and was Gods command that Jews were notorious and its written in the bible a something they carried out often, all the time, millions of accounts?


Oh wait, thats a stupid, becausethat isnt there, is not recorded and didnt happen

Its not like the bible didnt record every stupid and evil thing Israel committed, it did. Israel never sacrificed her children, (except once and was condemned and Jepth regreted it and bad story)

But NO, you seem to think God ordains it, requested it, not in the bible but in your common sense based brain, its called for. Never done but by your logic God demands it

Seriously, one vague, way the hell out of context verse and what, seriously, can yo.....

Whatever



posted on May, 23 2017 @ 10:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

Stop being a drama queen.

I'm pretty sure I have told you before that I was a devout christian at one point in my life.

I was probably a lot like you, thinking that those who question the bible just could not see. Making excuses for the flaws in the texts but those days are now passed. It's all just Jewish mythology to me now.

By the way, did you see where I said that it was "possible" that it was part of the religion at some point? That word is there for a reason.

You know what would have been a better excuse on your part, maybe you can use it from this point on, is that it is a mistake in translation and that since they are talking about sacrifices and they mention grains and wine that they are actually talking about firstborn male livestock.



posted on May, 23 2017 @ 11:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Raggedyman

Stop being a drama queen.

I'm pretty sure I have told you before that I was a devout christian at one point in my life.

I was probably a lot like you, thinking that those who question the bible just could not see. Making excuses for the flaws in the texts but those days are now passed. It's all just Jewish mythology to me now.

By the way, did you see where I said that it was "possible" that it was part of the religion at some point? That word is there for a reason.

You know what would have been a better excuse on your part, maybe you can use it from this point on, is that it is a mistake in translation and that since they are talking about sacrifices and they mention grains and wine that they are actually talking about firstborn male livestock.


Possible?
Possible?


All recorded history and not a jot about Jewish child sacrifice.
The OT recording how terrible the Jews acted and not a jot about Jewish child sacrifice.
Roman records and not a jot about Jewish child sacrifice.
Archaeology and not a jot about Jewish child sacrifice.

But you from the ether, possible?
I dont have to use anything but history, common sense, and your own word POSSIBLE, based more on your hopes and ignorance than anything valid

As for me, I believe the bible has faults, I question everything in it, constantly and call others to, so please dont for one second assume I am anything like you were
A person who believed and accepted everything you were told till you



posted on May, 23 2017 @ 11:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

Yes, anything is possible.

You asked a question I pointed to an iffy verse and you turned it into all this.



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 01:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Raggedyman

Yes, anything is possible.

You asked a question I pointed to an iffy verse and you turned it into all this.


Hmm
An iffy verse, an iffy verse indeed

One verse and you swing Judaism and child sacrifice on that one iffy verse
Make no mistake, the Jews were horrible and stupid people, we have the OT to prove that
Christians are horrible and stupid people, we have the recent history to prove that

But to suggest child sacrifice is acceptable in Judaism, against everything God taught, what Jesus stood for

Yes I turned it into this because one iffy verse and you were calling Jews child sacrificers and thats just stupid



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 01:47 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

God who resides outside the Universe and His one begotten Son - Yahushua is completely different to the little aliens that call themselves gods.

Jesus was murdered by Satan who was too ignorant to see that His death was going to function as a unbreakable link back to Heaven.

God allows Satan to rule this world to allow mortals to choose this hell or His Heaven via Jesus Christ.

What better way to find new recruits for Heaven than to put them into hell (Universe - darkness) and let them decide.

So either haSatan is an idiot who has not realized that he is obeying God's Master Plan, or he is part of the Grand Plan to weed out loyal recruits for Heaven.



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 02:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

I called it sketchy from the start. I pointed out that it could be read that way. The words themselves suggest that. Nothing more.



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 03:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Miracula2

That post didn't say that they killed with devine sanction it said they did it in the name of their beliefs.


If Abu-Bakr doesn't have confirmed Divine Sanction to violate the 10 Commandments then he is guilty of murder.

Plus Abu-Bakr established his headquarters in Raqqa.

Raca, similar pronunciation, if not exactly the same, was the name for a fool in Aramaic.



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 04:49 AM
link   
It is very obvious that the bible was written by man, and the thoughts of man at the time. The bible is very primitive and brutal, because people back then were primitive and brutal. Pretty much the same today


If the God from the bible was real, i would be absolutely gutted! I would not want to worship a God like that! To be honest, i would not worship any God!



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Miracula2

What does that have to do with what "that post" actually "said"?

It said that they kill in the name of their belief not that they were divinely sanctioned. You are arguing about something that was never said.

Whether that belief is properly grounded in scripture makes no difference.



posted on May, 25 2017 @ 12:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
May 22, 2017

Assuming that GOD (the Creator of all Things) is OMNIPOTENT, doesn't it follow that EVERYTHING that occurs within the Universe is condoned and enabled by GOD?

It should be.


originally posted by: carewemust
Take mankind for example. We display great LOVE and also great HATRED towards each other. Most religions teach that LOVE is of GOD, and HATE is of Satan. (Mother Theresa did GOD's work / Adolph Hitler did Satan's work)

Since God enables and allows Satan to do his evil work, isn't God just as responsible as Satan? After all, God created Satan and could destroy Satan in the blink of an eye, if he wanted to, if he is indeed omnipotent/all-powerful.

God Himself exterminate all living things to the point of near extinction, example, The Great Flood.
Satan has never cause such evil directly. Satan has to persuade human to cause evil.
God in the Bible threatening human with teribble mass destruction, favor certain race, threat human unequally and condone slavery so his as***ole believers/obedient god slaves, feel supremely right above all civil law.
God in the Bible is worse than Satan. I seriously dont understand why people want to worship such a pathetic God.


originally posted by: carewemust
For what reason does God allow his "children" to murder each other, be it one-on-one, or one killing thousands? The only "humane" explanation I can come up with, is that if millions of people weren't killed off, the planet wouldn't be able to handle the population growth. After all, how many people would be on the Earth now, if past mass-exterminations, and one-on-one murders never happened?

That's a pathetic excuse. God is the one who bring life to each and everyone of us. He could easily stop doing that by natural birth control and He does that everytime. But NOOOO. He has to bring us all to suffer his reckleness. He has to bring us all so he could mass murdered us later. He has to bring us all so we all could burn and become fuel in His hell. He is a pathetic god made by pathetic pagan cultures centuries ago.


originally posted by: carewemust
The alternative would be that God is a horrible "parent", who just doesn't care what happens. One that even allows us to go to hell after physical death.

No He is not. He is the mindset of culture whose survival require the strictest discipline of all. Things were harsh, uncompromiseable and dangerous back then. Food was scarce and people kill each other for it. Evil God is meant to discipline all those barbarian cultures. Hell is useless if Evil God decide to murder us all before judgment day becuse He already judge us all during our lifetime. The only reason why Hell exist is because this evil god is man made entity who require fuel in His interdimensional travel to enslave more living things. Only His most obedient human/creature slaves will prevail hell. That is why this man made evil God is selective in nature.


originally posted by: carewemust
I refuse to believe that our Creator would be that callous to his own children. I certainly couldn't/wouldn't condemn either of my two children to eternal torture, no matter WHAT they did. Could YOU?

How could I? My parents would move a mountain to make me happy. My parents would never harm me. My parents would break down and cry because it hurt them so much if I suffer my own wrongdoing. My parents understand my feeling eventhough I keep silent all my life. My parents are the God in my eyes. They are the one who deserve my worshipping.
And so are other people parents. Our Creator would have to prove better than that if He truly exist.


originally posted by: carewemust
No..all the things we feel are acts of horrendous evil, are indeed evil, but they are allowed because of God's LOVE of mankind, his children, as a whole. We just don't see the REAL REASONS that HE enables and allows them. Does that make sense to anyone else, besides yours truly?

-CareWeMust

I just dont see the REAL REASONS for God's LOVE of mankind to be very logical contradiction. Love is suppose to be simple to understand, even for a barbarian culture centuries ago. It only make sense to me when it's either;

A ) God doesnt exit

or

B ) God is so screwed up by religion doctrine that God's love is no longer comprehensive. Thus, it's up to oneself to find their own God within themself.

Yours sincere.



posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust


Assuming that GOD (the Creator of all Things) is OMNIPOTENT, doesn't it follow that EVERYTHING that occurs within the Universe is condoned and enabled by GOD?

No. If there were no evil how would righteousness be shown? If no evil existed then nothing could exist. Water is life if used correctly but if not used correctly water can kill life. Evil is that which is shown as not to be good but what is good without evil showing what good is?

Only the righteous will be allowed into the kingdom but without evil righteousness can not be shown and if only evil can be allowed into the kingdom then it also can not be shown without righteousness. Both must be shown together and that is why the scriptures tell us that God created both good and evil. Nevertheless, God shows both to teach opposites and does not condone both when shown equally.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join