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.

 

Biblical Deaths: How Many Did God Kill? How Many Did Satan Kill?

page: 24
55
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by corruptedtesssa
 



Sadly, the Christians have been duped but they fail to see, realize or understand that due to clouded judgement and many due to complete indoctrination from a young age.


Where does that leave us Christians who came to the faith very late in life after complete indoctrination to atheism and evolution in public schools from a very young age?





[edit on 20-8-2010 by NOTurTypical]




posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
Third time I'm asking. Research before you commit to a belief.


I can give you a third example also. I could give you over a hundred if we wanted to go there. However, the point is simply to illustrate that there are contradictions and it's intellectually dishonest to state otherwise. Do you really want to keep going with this tangent?



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by NewlyAwakened
reply to post by adjensen
 

I would avoid feeding the 13-year-old troll. Ignore it and it will go away.

Otherwise I've been enjoying reading this discussion. Carry on.





You gotta understand that when doing apologetics you actually use one their alleged contradictions from proverbs.

"Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him." ~ Proverbs 26:4

That means when a fool makes a ridiculous, straw man, or illogical claim, refuse to answer it according to it's logical flaws. Example: 'I don't agree with your claims for (reason X).

Then,

"Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit." ~ Proverbs 26:5

Take the fools fallacious argument to it's logical outcome and show them how foolish it really is based on logic. Don't let the fool think his argument is valid because you reject it and refuse to acknowledge it has merits, but show the fool the logical outcome of his absurd statements so he doesn't think he's made a sound argument.

Or, in layman's terms, "Debate 101".



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by faceoff85
Ita true that God destroyed/killed many people in the bible in contrast to the killings of Satan. But what is overlooked is the motivation, story behind it.

And in the end there is "MUCH more blood on the hands of Satan compared to YHWH". At the end of the day, if you want to stick to whats written in the bible, Satan is the SOLE reason we are not perfect human beings without knwoing death or war or ilness. Its safe to say that even God killing those people were as a direct result of Satan's initial actions. He is a master-manipulator, not without reason being called the angel of light.


Go read your bible. Isaiah chapter 45 verse 7. '' I form the light and I create darkness. I make peace and I create EVIL. I the Lord do ALL THESE THINGS''
By his own admission your God just quashed your arguement. Nuff said.



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Baloney
It is significantly frustrating trying to get any answers, that sometimes it is rather easy to become tempted to resort to a somewhat aggressive and "creative" approach.


Well I certainly agree that sometimes it is frustrating trying to get an answer and sometimes they never come. And I'd have to say that so far I don't really disagree with anything in your position. But I tend to think that politeness lends itself an invaluable tool to becoming an ambassador to your cause and beliefs. (Though I'm not always polite myself as we've seen in this very thread). Personally I try to avoid ticking off the believer when I'm really just disgusted with the belief. Anyway, it just makes for better conversation in my experience and again, proceed as you wish.... Cheers



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen
No worries, and thanks for the sympathies. I wrote up a piece about how grief can massively change your life, as it has done for me. If you've any interest, it's here: www.abovetopsecret.com...


Well written, sir and I felt some tears welling up in my eyes. Again, I am so sorry to hear about that and that you had to go though such a thing. Just terrible.



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by WENEEDAREVOLUTION
Go read your bible. Isaiah chapter 45 verse 7. '' I form the light and I create darkness. I make peace and I create EVIL. I the Lord do ALL THESE THINGS''
By his own admission your God just quashed your arguement. Nuff said.


So, did God say that? Or did Isaiah say that? Or did someone else?

Regardless, let's assume that God said it. What does it really mean? Does it mean "I have created evil, ha ha ha!" Or does it simply mean that, if God creates good, and imparts the ability for us to be "not good", through free will, he has effectively created evil? He has created the ability to be evil. Doesn't say he causes evil, or he's forcing you to make bad choices that lead to evil, just saying that if you really need to fix the blame on someone, his goodness and free will can allow you to pin it on him.

There's a huge philosophical difference between "I create evil" and "I cause evil", wouldn't you say?



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



Though I'm not a fundamentalist, I will point out that even they do not accept the inerrancy in the Bible, when it is due to clear human error, as in this case, or in the previous one, where it was pointed out that there is a difference between KJV and NIV as to who killed Goliath (and, in that case, ironically, the NIV has the translation correct, with a footnote that this is most likely due to a transcription error in the source Hebrew text, while the KJV changes it to the correct story without note.)


Wrong Sir, the NIV has the 'correct translation', because the NIV uses the Codex Sinaticus and Codex Vaticanus as it's Manuscripts. These manuscripts came out of the pagan Gnostic schools of Alexandria Egypt in the 2nd century. The KJV was not translated from the Codex Sinaticus or Vaticanus, but the Textus Receptus Manuscripts. The same manuscripts Jerome used for the Latin Bible. The problem is in the manuscripts themselves, not the translations they birthed.

HERE





[edit on 20-8-2010 by NOTurTypical]



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by adjensen
No worries, and thanks for the sympathies. I wrote up a piece about how grief can massively change your life, as it has done for me. If you've any interest, it's here: www.abovetopsecret.com...


Well written, sir and I felt some tears welling up in my eyes. Again, I am so sorry to hear about that and that you had to go though such a thing. Just terrible.


Thank you again. It's been a while since I wrote that, and I'm somewhat better, somewhat worse, but it is, sadly, an experience that most everyone will go through, and there's seemingly nothing that you can do to prepare for it. Whether you're smacked in the face with it, as I was, or it's a long process, where you can anticipate the inevitable, that moment of permanent and complete separation is an inevitably life defining moment.



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 11:50 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Not only that, but when God causes calamity or trouble to fall upon those whom He has placed judgment over, they would certainly think God was evil for His judgment. But since you brought it up, I'll explain Hebrew to English for WNAR:

"Ra'âh",the Hebrew word translated "evil" in the KJV often refers to adversity or calamity. There are two forms of the word. Strong's H7451a most often refers to moral evil, whereas Strong's H7451b (the form used here) most often refers to calamity or distress. Obviously, "calamity" is a better antonym of "peace" than "evil."

NEXT?



[edit on 20-8-2010 by NOTurTypical]



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Wrong Sir, the NIV has the 'correct translation', because the NIV uses the Codex Sinaticus and Codex Vaticanus as it's Manuscripts. These manuscripts came out of the pagan Gnostic schools of Alexandria Egypt in the 2nd century. The KJV was not translated from the Codex Sinaticus or Vaticanus, but the Textus Receptus Manuscripts. The same manuscripts Jerome used for the Latin Bible. The problem is in the manuscripts themselves, not the translations they birthed.


Well, you are quire likely correct, I'm not particularly familiar with the history of the Bible, as it's not all that important to me. But, as a reader, I'm capable of discerning that, if there's a lengthy passage discussing David and Goliath, which helps to fill out the character of David, and then a mostly cast away line that seems to contradict it later, there is likely an error on the short bit, not on the long bit. As is supported in the footnotes.

It would be interesting to determine why the NIV (or any other translation) uses those Codexes as its basis for the Old Testament, rather than the one that you cite as the KJV being based on, because I'm sure that they have some sort of argument of validity, but, as I said, ultimately it doesn't matter all that much. Minor textual differences can hardly result in an overhauling of Christianity, and I think that we've all pretty much gotten the message.



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



It would be interesting to determine why the NIV (or any other translation) uses those Codexes as its basis for the Old Testament, rather than the one that you cite as the KJV being based on, because I'm sure that they have some sort of argument of validity, but, as I said, ultimately it doesn't matter all that much. Minor textual differences can hardly result in an overhauling of Christianity, and I think that we've all pretty much gotten the message.


Well, part of it is explained in the link, I hope you'll take a few minutes to read it. But basically, Westcott and Hort didn't like the traditional Bible, they were textual and doctrinal critics. And when they set out to make a modern translation they fell prey to a basic logical fallacy: OLDER IS BETTER

They didn't understand why the older manuscripts were available and the newer manuscripts were the true ones. It's because the church fathers and disciples of the apostles in the 1st and 2nd century rejected the manuscripts from Egypt as heretical and DIDN'T use them. The early manuscripts that made up what we call the Textus Receptus were used extensively and worn out making it necessary to copy them every 50-60 years or so, the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaticus sat in places collecting dust, then hundreds and hundreds of years later when they were rediscovered people said "Hey!! These are earlier manuscripts!!" Not realizing WHY they stood the test of time.

They were rejected as heretical and barely used.



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 
A good point
and i do tend to generalize too much, a fault of mine i do recognize lol.. i was speaking of the mass majority, the sheep herd that doesnt know anything else than such indoctrination.
And if an adult chooses themselves to become a Christian (or any other numerous faiths out there), though i dont understand it i respect peoples choice in life and in religious beliefs..but it doesnt change my opinion that organized religion followers of any sect really, have been duped, but given the OP topic of God and Satan, Christianity is the one im going with on this..but i believe its all religions



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by corruptedtesssa
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 
A good point
and i do tend to generalize too much, a fault of mine i do recognize lol.. i was speaking of the mass majority, the sheep herd that doesnt know anything else than such indoctrination.
And if an adult chooses themselves to become a Christian (or any other numerous faiths out there), though i dont understand it i respect peoples choice in life and in religious beliefs..but it doesnt change my opinion that organized religion followers of any sect really, have been duped, but given the OP topic of God and Satan, Christianity is the one im going with on this..but i believe its all religions



With that we most certainly have common ground ma'am. Take a peek at the link in my sig "Do you HATE religion as much as me?" The Lord Jesus Christ was murdered by the religious people when He came to Earth. I don't condemn them, because they are still "blind", as in "the blind are leading the blind". But, Jesus had a different message which was essentially:

"Stop trusting yourselves for righteousness, trust me, I've already finished everything. It's done, trust ME."



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 

I agree entirely, and thank you for the reply..
I cant say that i dont hold a concept of a god, just not the normal concept of 'him'..to me its more of a collective 'god mind' like situation, energy itself, without form..I cant personally not believe that something did create everything that exists in this world and in the multiverse entirely. how, why, what or who i have no clue, none of us do..
Faith is a strong thing in humanity for most people in some way or another, but faith often gets passed around as truths or facts which can be a reallly bad issue..
I also see what you mean as to the defensive blockaid some put up in a blind state to make it ok in their own minds, to justify and to explain such actions as the deaths their so called 'God' has on his hands, what always did it for me when i was younger was when the term 'god fearing' came up..if he was oh so lovely and benevolent as they seem to believe then why exactly should he be feared?
Thank you again for taking the time to write this thread, i hope that it helps at least someone, or a few someones around here to think a bit more about this..



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by corruptedtesssa
I cant personally not believe that something did create everything that exists in this world and in the multiverse entirely. how, why, what or who i have no clue, none of us do..


To me the importance in this question comes down to whether you believe this to have a naturalistic source such as the Big Bang theory or whether you chalk it up to a supernatural cause such as creationism.

Such a question ultimately resides in the domain of the cosmologist, not religions. So I tend to view the religious accounts for such a large mystery to be completely in error, and even the scores of creation accounts from various cultures around the world cannot agree on anything other than it must have been "created".

I'm personally fine with not knowing. And I tend to view with suspicion anyone who thinks that the "creator" is a "who". In such cases I think they're starting out with a faulty premise.



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Satan tends to not kill so many people because most of them belong to him and are doing evil. Also he enjoys corrupting people and leading them further away from Jehovah. He wants everyone to believe that God is evil or crazy, remember that is what he did with Adam and Eve.. He made them think that they could be like God and that somehow they were missing out on something good since they were innocent and perfect.. WOW were they surprised.

Satan threw many nations at God's chosen people and he had to protect his people so that the messiah could be born.

I tell you what though, calculate how many people have died of old age since Adam and Eve and apply that number to Satan's side since he is the one that deceived the original couple.

[edit on 20-8-2010 by Staben]



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 04:04 PM
link   
GOD said "The wages of sin is death!!"

God eventually kills everyone.



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 04:53 PM
link   
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


How is it a tangent? It is the topic of the thread. Thus far you've not shown any proof. And as I've shown, you post from other sources without researching yourself. If you want to continue go on. If you'd rather research matters yourself and save the embarrassment, I think that's a far better path to take.



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by prophecywatcher
He created, he can destroy- end of story.



One word for you my friend stupid....!!!!


Peavce,
E



new topics

top topics



 
55
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join