If God is perfect then....

Originally posted by AQuestion

Originally posted by mrperplexed

Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by mrperplexed

 

Let me throw a thought at you. Lets say you lived a life and had a heart dedicated to others and there turned out that there was no God; but, you continued as a sentient being. What is the worst that would be true of your eternity, it would be that you loved others. Now, lets consider the inverse.

But why tie God to love? Certainly there are many who dont believe in God who are capable of giving love greater than some Christians, so I dont see causation or correlation.

I do however like the "life lessons" that can be garnered from such teachings. If I could get past my stark disbelief that there is an ethereal being that made me just to worship him, then I suppose I could be rather happy.

reply to post by mrperplexed


Dear mrperplexed,

But why tie God to love? Certainly there are many who dont believe in God who are capable of giving love greater than some Christians, so I dont see causation or correlation. I do however like the "life lessons" that can be garnered from such teachings. If I could get past my stark disbelief that there is an ethereal being that made me just to worship him, then I suppose I could be rather happy.

You like asking questions; but, fail to answer what you are asked. If you are so sure of your beliefs then answer the questions. As I read your words, I am sorry that you believe such nonsense about God or the bible. You have both bad theology and bad logic. You assume that the theology you were told was correct is and that a Christian can love less than a non-Christian. You got it wrong, we are judged by our fruit and we do not love all of Gods creation then we are not truly a Christian, we are perverts of the word. Jesus said many would come to him proclaiming his name and he would tell them he never knew them because they did not have a heart of love. We are judged by our hearts, it is not enough to say you believe he existed, that is Satan's lie.

Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by mrperplexed

 

Dear mrperplexed,

You like asking questions; but, fail to answer what you are asked. If you are so sure of your beliefs then answer the questions. As I read your words, I am sorry that you believe such nonsense about God or the bible. You have both bad theology and bad logic. You assume that the theology you were told was correct is and that a Christian can love less than a non-Christian. You got it wrong, we are judged by our fruit and we do not love all of Gods creation then we are not truly a Christian, we are perverts of the word. Jesus said many would come to him proclaiming his name and he would tell them he never knew them because they did not have a heart of love. We are judged by our hearts, it is not enough to say you believe he existed, that is Satan's lie.

I do not claim to be sure of my beliefs at all, nor do I have definitive answers. I am happy to answer any question, I am not sure which I avoided that you are addressing above.

My understanding of Gods word came from the church- can I be faulted for what I was taught?

Also, I think there is no monopoly on love for either side, which what I was trying to convey. Do you believe that Non Christians are incapable of loving like Christians?

reply to post by AQuestion

Originally posted by AQuestion
Dear arpgme,

I disagree, an emotionless God is not perfect. We are made in his image and we have emotions. Does the Holy Spirit have no emotion, did Jesus have no emotion because we know he wept. Having emotions does not mean that you can be controlled by them, it means you have them, free will allows us to determine how we respond to our emotions.

First of all you are assuming that Christianity is true, and that Jesus is God. Second, if Jesus was "weeping" then he was overtaken by emotion. Crying, Laughing, increased heartbeat is emotion taking over the body.

reply to post by mrperplexed


Dear mrperplexed,

LOL.

My understanding of Gods word came from the church- can I be faulted for what I was taught? Also, I think there is no monopoly on love for either side, which what I was trying to convey. Do you believe that Non Christians are incapable of loving like Christians?

The church, what church. If you were raised as a Satanists, should I accept your understanding of God? What "church" did you go to? What makes you think that because they called themselves "christians", I accept them? I think Benny Hinn teaches spiritual poison, he says he is a christian, do I have to agree with him? I don't believe being a Christian is the garbage you were taught, labeling is for bigots.

Your last question means you didn't understand one thing I said. If you love with all your heart all that is, all the God created (and he does not create things to be hated by him) then you are a Christian. Jesus said to love God with all your heart and your neighbor as yourself, do you think he condemns people for doing what he told us to do? I don't defend the bad theology you were taught, why don't you learn the truth, the real truth. You asked if you were responsible for accepting bad theology, yes, you are. If you actually cared about others as much as you care about yourself, you would know the truth. The truth is that we all matter as much as we matter to ourselves. That is the truth and it has been in front of us all for as long as sentient beings have been around. Think about it.

reply to post by arpgme


LOL.

reply to post by AQuestion


I hope you'll be lol-ing when the mods find out that you made a spam post that lacked the requirement of a second line and had only three letters...

You should edit your post and try again... this time with actual reasoning/arguments...

Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by mrperplexed

 

Dear mrperplexed,

LOL.

My understanding of Gods word came from the church- can I be faulted for what I was taught? Also, I think there is no monopoly on love for either side, which what I was trying to convey. Do you believe that Non Christians are incapable of loving like Christians?

The church, what church. If you were raised as a Satanists, should I accept your understanding of God? What "church" did you go to? What makes you think that because they called themselves "christians", I accept them? I think Benny Hinn teaches spiritual poison, he says he is a christian, do I have to agree with him? I don't believe being a Christian is the garbage you were taught, labeling is for bigots.

Your last question means you didn't understand one thing I said. If you love with all your heart all that is, all the God created (and he does not create things to be hated by him) then you are a Christian. Jesus said to love God with all your heart and your neighbor as yourself, do you think he condemns people for doing what he told us to do? I don't defend the bad theology you were taught, why don't you learn the truth, the real truth. You asked if you were responsible for accepting bad theology, yes, you are. If you actually cared about others as much as you care about yourself, you would know the truth. The truth is that we all matter as much as we matter to ourselves. That is the truth and it has been in front of us all for as long as sentient beings have been around. Think about it.

I was raised Catholic early on, then later on Baptist. I don't argue that all humans are equal in value, but I certainly do not love people equally. In my eyes a pedophile or mass murderer does not deserve any love from me.

reply to post by mrperplexed


Dear mrperplexed,

I was raised Catholic early on, then later on Baptist. I don't argue that all humans are equal in value, but I certainly do not love people equally. In my eyes a pedophile or mass murderer does not deserve any love from me.

And this in the end is why you agree with the people who teach bad theology. You wish to judge others, you are no different than the people that taught you bad theology, we were told to let God judge others and not judge them ourselves. You don't like that because you do not believe in grace. I do.

Originally posted by mrperplexed

Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by mrperplexed

 

Dear mrperplexed,

LOL.

You asked if you were responsible for accepting bad theology, yes, you are.

What makes you so sure that your beliefs are right over mine or anyone elses?

reply to post by mrperplexed

He will have no emotion or care that I do not believe in him.
He will have no emotion or care that you do believe in him.
Or am I wrong? (If so, why?)

The universe doesn't care about you, one way or the other, to it, you are so many atoms that can be exploded and made into something else, with no concern about you as a person and what happens to that.
That is why we have God, to care about what happens to us. Now, if you, yourself, take upon yourself the same attitude concerning your own fate, that the universe does, then ignore God, and go into oblivion.
If you do care if you as a person has a future or not, then take advantage of what God has to offer, which is life, and life eternal.
God is not under some moral obligation to deal with your situation, and really there wouldn't be a such thing as a moral obligation but that God took it upon Himself to care about you and to not sitting around taking care of His own concerns and desires, but separated Himself from those pursuits to help people who were not able to take care of those things for themselves, being trapped in this material matrix of existence and vulnerable to the nature of how that system works, of the changing fortunes of things made of those materials and what happens to them and their transient nature.

LOL IN THE SAME PARAGRAPH NO LESS.

You wish to judge others, you are no different than the people that taught you bad theology, we were told to let God judge others and not judge them ourselves. You don't like that because you do not believe in grace. I do.

THEN YOU MAKE A CHARACTER JUDGMENT ABOUT ME

You don't like that because you do not believe in grace. I do.

Originally posted by arpgme
reply to post by AQuestion

 

I hope you'll be lol-ing when the mods find out that you made a spam post that lacked the requirement of a second line and had only three letters...

You should edit your post and try again... this time with actual reasoning/arguments...

Dear arpgme,

Oh, no. I will surprised if the Mods come beat me up for my last response. I was actually being very nice to you.

First of all you are assuming that Christianity is true, and that Jesus is God. Second, if Jesus was "weeping" then he was overtaken by emotion. Crying, Laughing, increased heartbeat is emotion taking over the body.

You start by saying that I am accepting the hypothetical that the OP began with. Yeah, I did or we cannot have much of a conversation. If someone starts with certain precepts then we should accept them as being the basis of their question. This is pretty simple, it is how we have conversations about thoughts.

Your second sentence made even less sense. Experiencing emotions is not death, it is life. It is not "taking over" you, it is your experience. People feel the way they feel, they react in the manner that defines them, there is a difference.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by mrperplexed

 

He will have no emotion or care that I do not believe in him.
He will have no emotion or care that you do believe in him.
Or am I wrong? (If so, why?)

The universe doesn't care about you, one way or the other, to it, you are so many atoms that can be exploded and made into something else, with no concern about you as a person and what happens to that.
That is why we have God, to care about what happens to us. Now, if you, yourself, take upon yourself the same attitude concerning your own fate, that the universe does, then ignore God, and go into oblivion.
If you do care if you as a person has a future or not, then take advantage of what God has to offer, which is life, and life eternal.
God is not under some moral obligation to deal with your situation, and really there wouldn't be a such thing as a moral obligation but that God took it upon Himself to care about you and to not sitting around taking care of His own concerns and desires, but separated Himself from those pursuits to help people who were not able to take care of those things for themselves, being trapped in this material matrix of existence and vulnerable to the nature of how that system works, of the changing fortunes of things made of those materials and what happens to them and their transient nature.

edit on 26-2-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

If only this had ended at the end of the first paragraph, I would have starred and flagged and applauded you. Your explanation of God is so riddled with human entrapments, there is no sense of divinity... but I think you nailed the first paragraph.

Originally posted by AQuestion

Originally posted by arpgme
reply to post by AQuestion

 

You start by saying that I am accepting the hypothetical that the OP began with. Yeah, I did or we cannot have much of a conversation. If someone starts with certain precepts then we should accept them as being the basis of their question.

- I agree with the above, I did set the precepts. However the point may have been that my definition of God may not have been the Christian God.

Experiencing emotions is not death, it is life. It is not "taking over" you, it is your experience. People feel the way they feel, they react in the manner that defines them, there is a difference.

However in relation to a perfect God, Emotion equals compromise, this imperfection.

reply to post by mrperplexed

Your explanation of God is so riddled with human entrapments, there is no sense of divinity...

This wanting to 'sense the divine' is what got you into this spot to start with.
God cares about us because He is like us, only not dependent on material for His existence.
We can enjoy the physical universe because we are made of it, that's why there is a universe.
God, or the gods, sacrificed that enjoyment for themselves for the sake of the others, who are we, who do live in the universe but are susceptible to the same destruction that everything else is in the universe.
We are like the gods, but we aren't, for whatever reason.
The gods are like us, but they aren't, basically because they took upon themselves the burden of caring for us.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by mrperplexed

 

Your explanation of God is so riddled with human entrapments, there is no sense of divinity...

This wanting to 'sense the divine' is what got you into this spot to start with.
God cares about us because He is like us, only not dependent on material for His existence.
We can enjoy the physical universe because we are made of it, that's why there is a universe.
God, or the gods, sacrificed that enjoyment for themselves for the sake of the others, who are we, who do live in the universe but are susceptible to the same destruction that everything else is in the universe.
We are like the gods, but we aren't, for whatever reason.
The gods are like us, but they aren't, basically because they took upon themselves the burden of caring for us.

Interesting, What is your religion, if you believe in the possibility of multiple gods? The mere mention of a God having to sacrifice immediately shows imperfection, as it shows going without, longing, yearning, needing.

Originally posted by mrperplexed
He will have no emotion or care that I do not believe in him.

He will have no emotion or care that you do believe in him.

Or am I wrong? (If so, why?)

He believes in you... Regardless of your belief in him

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by mrperplexed
He will have no emotion or care that I do not believe in him.

He will have no emotion or care that you do believe in him.

Or am I wrong? (If so, why?)

He believes in you... Regardless of your belief in him

Well as my creator he should believe in me, however he does not care that I do not believe in him.

reply to post by AQuestion


mrperplexed is right. No where in that Original Post did I see anything about a "Jesus" or a "Holy Spirit". Only the concept of God was mentioned and that is what I responded to.

So you did not "agree" to the "hypothetical" you simply assumed (whether or not he actually was referring to the Christian god).