My Only God Thread. Why, If God Is Our Father, Doent He Intervene So We Dont Die Or Suffer?

reply to post by jfj123


Suffering isn't some kind of tough love. Yes, we learn from living with sin, but that's not why it came to be in the first place. Suffering entered into the world when we fell from grace in the very beginning. Sin is a consequence of our first disobedience of God.

Originally posted by Totakeke
reply to post by jfj123

 

Suffering isn't some kind of tough love. Yes, we learn from living with sin, but that's not why it came to be in the first place. Suffering entered into the world when we fell from grace in the very beginning. Sin is a consequence of our first disobedience of God.

That makes no sense at all....sorry.

You're telling me we get screwed because of something that someone did a long time ago that we had NOTHING to do with.

Like I've said before, that's like convicting you of theft because your great, great grandfather stole a sucker from the local general store. It simply makes no sense at all.

reply to post by teapot

Recently, that holy grail of science has found a way to 'measure' the existance of telepathic communication,

This may well be the case my friend, and I hope so, then as soon as they get proficient in measuring what is currently the "supernatural" maybe xtains could pray to jesus to regenerate an amputated limb for measuring.

It is absolutely not good enough to observe what may be an event or action currently unknown or measured and claim that it must be a product of jesus or any other god.

I am open to the possibilities of many different types of supernatural events or activate, but I don't go running to church if ever they are measured.

reply to post by Totakeke

I think a lot of women would be flattered that their husband is jealous of the fact that someone is flirting with them. That's what a husband does, he loves his wife.

Perhaps you should spend a little time in a womens' refuge my friend, you may fully understand the legacy of your gods jealousy.

Perhaps you may be a little more persuasive than their former partners in how they should submit themselves to their husbands.

I've no idea how many women actually post in these forums but I can't imagine anyone less than completely deluded submiting to the dogma of the yahwhe jesus god.

reply to post by Totakeke

If you'd actually read the Bible and take the verses in context there aren't any contradictions,

You are joking of course ?

Where do you want to begin?

Myself and others can post a contradiction or an error one at a time and you can then explain how it is not an error or contradiction by using context.

You up for this challenge dude ?

reply to post by Totakeke

I think it's because you're looking for contradictions. The Bible isn't meant to be picked apart.

You say you "think" this means you don't know something then you make the claim "The Bible isn't" which implies you do know something.

I also note you say "The Bible" which is singular when it is common knowledge there is more than one type, so it should be "The BIbles" plural.

So, before we even open the book, you start off with a contradiction and an error.

I don't reckon on your chances my friend, want a head start for 30 points ?

Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
reply to post by desert

 

I dunno, dg, I have seen some incredible acts of compassion by my fellow human beings.

me too

I don't think it helps to always sell ourselves short - we can do some amazing things sometimes - just beautiful

it gets lost in all the rest somehow

also - the billions of tiny little kindnesses we show each other each day all add up - they just don't show up on CNN

Oh, for sure, for sure, Spira! And we should not be doing all those kindnesses because we expect something in return or to be honored. Most people will say "Thank you!" or smile, but even if we receive no reply or our act is misinterpreted or an angry reply, those are not reasons to quit doing kindnesses.

It is easier to do what we THINK we should do, such as try to call out/take out the splinter in someone else's eye rather than the log in our own eye. Such actions might merit us an applause from those around us or might make us feel that we have done something "right", which puffs us up and could make us insufferable to be around Calling out/taking out someone else's splinter is easier and therefore preferable than doing the hard part, the hard work, of trying to take out our own log from our own eye. Doing that is painful, and we probably won't get the notice from anyone else, or we might suffer ridicule for the process.

Doing kindnesses does not come from thinking but from the heart. It is our heart, rather than our head, that is closest to God. Working from the head is easy for humans. Working from the heart takes courage to do the right thing, courage to love one another, courage to put love into action by doing kindnesses, especially without expecting anything in return. (The heart needs nothing in return. The heart grows merely by the practice of unconditional love.)

reply to post by desert

It is easier to do what we THINK we should do...

well - that's most of it right there

:-)

if I only ever knew for sure what I should do...

reply to post by dgtempe


Two words: Free will.

I prize nothing more than my free will and the responsibility to use it as I see fit without intervention.

You could never be perfect if you didn't have the ability to "sin".

reply to post by jprophet420

Two words: Free will.

One word : design, if there is a god a creator of all that there is then free will is an illusion

You could never be perfect if you didn't have the ability to "sin".

According to xtians at least, sin is by definition being separate from the creator.
This is impossible if the yawhejesus god is the creator of all that there is.

One word : design, if there is a god a creator of all that there is then free will is an illusion

That makes no sense whatsoever, or at the very least is non sequitur. Heres what the Harvard debate team said when asked about non sequiturs:

We love pizza.

According to xtians at least, sin is by definition being separate from the creator.
This is impossible if the yawhejesus god is the creator of all that there is.

No, thats what made Jesus righteous. He could sin but didn't.

I can really understand your sig after our short conversation.

reply to post by jprophet420

No, thats what made Jesus righteous. He could sin but didn't.

Absolute xtian bunk, how on earth could jesus (if he was real) possibly sin ?

To sin (as described earlier) is, according to xtianity to be separate form god.

As jesus is (according to xtianity) god the creator, how on earth can he possibly separate from himself ?

Unless of course your definition of sin is a different one than that of other xtians.

reply to post by moocowman


Jesus is the physical incarnation of 1/3 of the holy trinity, and you need flesh to sin. The bible also mentions that. Don't quote only part of a ruleset and expect to be able to do the math. Garbage in = garbage out. I mean that in a nice way.

BTW, way to infer that I am a Cristian because I have given unbiased thought to the subject. I'm also a "truther" and "conspiracy theorist".

[edit on 4-7-2009 by jprophet420]

reply to post by jprophet420



One word : design, if there is a god a creator of all that there is then free will is an illusion

That makes no sense whatsoever, or at the very least is non sequitur.

If god is the creator of everything , then there is nothing that is not or will not, be created by god.

If God is the source of all that there is, ever was or will be, thismakes god "all" that there is.

If god is all that there is then there cannot be anything that god is not and a requirement of free will is that there be something that god is not, which would make god not all that there is.

If however there is a truth in free will, it can either be the delusion of men or an illusion by god.

reply to post by jprophet420

Jesus is the physical incarnation of 1/3 of the holy trinity

,

Absolute xtian garbage, to say this as a fact is but to bare witness to a delusion. Nevertheless the claim of xtianity is that jesus is god and god is jesus who is also yahweh.

I believe it was the encyclopedia America that stated that the trinity is beyond human comprehension, IE a crock invented by the early catholic church to put to bed some awkward questions.

and you need flesh to sin.

Satan or his armies of fallen angels didn't, and when exactly did the jesus yawhweh spirit god make this rule, which was obviously broken by a talking snake ?

If god is the creator of everything , then there is nothing that is not or will not, be created by god.
you left out the word indirectly, which changes the entire statement

If God is the source of all that there is, ever was or will be, thismakes god "all" that there is.
No, it means god is the source

If god is all that there is then there cannot be anything that god is not and a requirement of free will is that there be something that god is not, which would make god not all that there is.
You have now drawn a conclusion based on 2 logical fallacies

If however there is a truth in free will, it can either be the delusion of men or an illusion by god.
Truth, delusion, and illusion are of course the same thing. I stand erected.





[edit on 4-7-2009 by jprophet420]

An ILLUSION is a false mental image produced by misinterpretation of things that actually exist.

A DELUSION is a persistent false belief: A paranoiac has delusions of persecution.

Just a little claificaiton there.

reply to post by moocowman


You're wrong. Sin isn't separation from God, sin is disobeying God. If a sinner isn't forgiven by Christ when they die then they get completely separated from God, which is what Hell is.

Also, do you have such a problem with religion that you can't even spell it correctly? "xtianity" is not a religion; Christianity is.

[edit on 4-7-2009 by Totakeke]

wanted to chill everyone out

good lyrics!

i love you all no matter what we all do or say we are all in this SH1T together!!

always remember that my brothers and sisters

/me bows

[edit on 4-7-2009 by symmetricAvenger]

[edit on 4-7-2009 by symmetricAvenger]

reply to post by count66


Ok this is my first post and this is all I have to say. Of god is all knowing and all seeing how could he let one of his children be born knowing that they would not be saved and go to hell for eternity? That to me seems pretty short sighted and/or masochistic. And that would be the antitheses of God


[edit on 5-7-2009 by alexwoodson]