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.

 

Honest question about god!

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
So, let me get this straight. When one gives you Biblical answers, they are lame? Then I'll not give you an answer to that. Just as when a
Well...once again, I see you take things completely out of context...why do you that? Not "all" answers are lame...but many are! You can not explain something to someone who is trying to honestly understand, by quoting verse...which is what I get a lot.....or saying "because that's the way it is....what if someone were trying to understand and re-thinking their belief system...is that really the way you talk to them. about your faith ..it's ridiculous!


To the second question, the answer is twofold. One, it is obedience on the part of the human. The second part, the animal blood covered the sins of the believer until the Redeemer came to shed His own blood to wash away the previously covered sins.

Why!? Why would blood have to be shed, in order to cover anything for an omnipotent god...I don't understand that...how does spilling anything/ones blood cover a sin? How does that work? explain it to me. How can something losing it's life make a person's sin better....I'm not grasping this.


[edit on 10/31/2004 by LadyV]




posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyV
You can not explain something to someone who is trying to honestly understand, by quoting verse...which is what I get a lot.....or saying "because that's the way it is....what if someone were trying to understand and re-thinking their belief system...is that really the way you talk to them. about your faith ..it's ridiculous!


So you want to ask a Biblical question and leave out the Bible? This doesn’t make much sense to me. I suspect you’ve already come to your own conclusions and aren’t really looking for answers. If you just wanted to say it’s a load of BS you should have started a thread saying so.



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by kinglizard


So you want to ask a Biblical question and leave out the Bible?


Are you saying you honestly can't understand that! LOL You can't explain something to someone by quoting bible verse....damn! If I, or some others, understood it from bible verse...we wouldn't be asking now would we!? I don't need this same rhetoric I always get from Christians, I though I would ask an honest question....forget it...it's the same ol crap I always get from you guys....what would your god think of you, if I were were beginning to question, and really wanted serious answers to help me...probably not much as this is the way you chase people off....never mind...

EDITED to add that this was a pointless thread, a bad idea, and the wrong place for me to ask these questions...I'm outa here...

[edit on 10/31/2004 by LadyV]



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Honestly LadyV you can’t be serious. How do you want your questions about the Catholic faith answered? I am currently unable to speak with Moses or Abraham so we need to find answers to these questions in the Bible, the same place you got your questions.



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 08:55 PM
link   
LadyV,

I assume you speak of Christianity/Judaism. So, I will address my answer for this assumption. I hope this helps.

I think it best to answer your second question(s) first, and then move on to the first question(s).


Why did an omnipotent god need an animal killed, sacrificed to him?


He didn't.

Leviticus 5:11-12
But if he be not able to bring two turtledoves, or two young pigeons, then he that sinned shall bring for his offering the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour for a sin offering; he shall put no oil upon it, neither shall he put [any] frankincense thereon: for it [is] a sin offering. Then shall he bring it to the priest, and the priest shall take his handful of it, [even] a memorial thereof, and burn [it] on the altar, according to the offerings made by fire unto the LORD: it [is] a sin offering.


Hosea 6:6
For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.



Did it have anything to do with the energy released from this animal at the time of it's death?


It has to do with giving the best that you can afford as atonement-- a physical reparation for one's offense; a surrender of something of value to demostrate one's sorrow for one's transgression.

But such sacrifice is not the only way to demostrate this sorrow.

Psalm 51:16-17
For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give [it]: thou delightest not in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God [are] a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.



Why would someone have to die for anyone else's' sins?


He didn't.

Mark 2:5
When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.

Luke 7:47-48
Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, [the same] loveth little. And he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven.


Their sins were forgiven while Jesus was alive and no sacrifice was given.


How does someone dying make it any easier for someone to be forgiven?


It doesn't.

Comparing the death of Christ to a blood sacrifice for sin allowed men, who thought a sacrifice was required but too poor to afford one, to understand that they could be forgiven without sacrifice.

Remember, what the poor knew of their religion were taught by religious leaders; they did not read the scriptures themselves. One of the first questions to be asked by a potential convert would have likely been "How can my sins be forgiven without a sacrifice in the temple?" An answer that would quickly satisfy that question is "Jesus' death on the cross was a sacrifice for the sins of all men."



Editted for typos

[edit on 31-10-2004 by Raphael_UO]



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyV
I have two questions...I have asked them before, here and other places. The first one I always get the same lame answer and bible verse quoted which does/explains nothing! The second one is always skipped over and not mentioned at all!

1) Why would someone have to die for anyone else's' sins? This makes no sense what so ever. How does someone dying make it any easier for someone to be forgiven?
2) Why did an omnipotent god need an animal killed, sacrificed to him? Did it have anything to do with the energy released from this animal at the time of it's death? That something needed and used (feed of off) that energy at certain times. It makes no sense that an omnipotent, almighty god would need something killed for it!
[edit on 10/31/2004 by LadyV]


I think your second question needs to be answered before the first can be approached.
Most ancient religions, even here in the Americas too, required periodic blood sacrifices. Sometimes these were animal and sometimes human. Unlike many ancient "gods", the God of Israel is not recorded in the generally accepted Christian Bibles of today as demanding a periodic Ritual Human Sacrifice.
God gave a list of rules that were to be obeyed by the Nation of Israel, his CHOSEN PEOPLE. Failure to comply was cause for punishment. Even today, society has rules and laws, with punishments for breaking them.
The blood of the slain animal was to be a substitute payment for the sin/crime of the person, or the people as a whole. Blood was only part of the sacrifices required. This would be sort of like paying a fine, making restitution against a wronged party, or going to jail..
As far as question #1, The Old Testament predicted a time when a Messiah would come to change the system. Because blood was an accepted way to pay for sin, blood would be required still. Not just any blood, but perfect, sinless blood of an innocent. A scapegoat. Under all translations of the Bible I have seen, admittedly only in English, Jesus is declared to be this scapegoat. Believing in the death and later resurection of this God-Man, Jesus of miraculous birth, covers the sin so it can never be seen and so is forgiven.
At least this is the way I understand it.
It is awkward trying to answer a question based on something Biblical without using the Bible, but I have tried. I do admit, however that I did allude to it. I hope the answers were different enough from the ones you usually get that you can begin to understand the "WHY" asked in both your questions.
The Bible can be difficult to understand. Perhaps that is why there are so many ideas of what is in it. Even Christians disagree about some things. Sometimes I forget that. Perhaps too many of my posts here in ATS reflect that. I should maybe try to answer without using the Bible quite so much., or explain it better when I do.
LadyV, you also wrote:


EDITED to add that this was a pointless thread, a bad idea, and the wrong place for me to ask these questions...I'm outa here...

I hope you come back to this thread to read this and other replies.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by LadyV

I have read the responses, and it still makes no logical sense to me...it just doesn't fit that "anything" has to die for anyone else's sin...an omnipotent god could do whatever he wanted to...and there is just no reason to slaughter anything for a god...I was kinda hoping someone would say something that that made sense to me and made me sat "Oooohh ok...I get it" but it just makes not a bit of sense...like telling someone to run around a wall X amount of times blowing a horn x amount of times to make a wall fall...no sense what so ever...I went to a double Christening today two of my grandsons...their mother is Catholic. I watched very, very carefully and listened well....it's was all so ritualistic and much like a pagan gathering...absolutely beautiful old church, lots of anointing oils, and signs of the cross on foreheads and such.....


Well, I think dbrandt did a fine job in answering, and everlastingnoitall had some good points. I'll try and explain it too. Maybe my wording will strike a better chord with you.

First of all, what is the definition of sin anyway? The definition of sin is to miss the mark, or to fall short. But what is the mark that is supposed to be aimed at, and what are we falling short of when we sin? We sin when we fall short of, or fail to live up to God's laws and desires that he has for us. We sin when we deny him in our lives. Does that sound strict? Well in a way it is, but not too much if you think about it in the right way. The laws aren't forced upon us, because we may obey them or not. They are just God's laws or better, guidelines, that must be followed if one wants to remain pure, or perfect. This is what he desires. Why does he desire for us to be pure and perfect? Because God is perfect, he cannot be amongst (or a better word, connected to) fallability, because he could no longer be himself, as he is defined in being. So when one sins, one is marred and their spirit/soul is automatically broken off from God, like a limb may be amputated if it has a poison in it, so it can't infect the body. So one is separated not because God just casually tosses you away from him in disgust, but that if God is to be/remain the being he is, the disconnection is inevitable. But God desires none of us to be separated at all. This is the reason he desires us to be perfectly in sync with him and pure. Because he just desires for us not to fall away from him! It's out of love. So that's the basic reason for the laws he gave us. So that we know better, that we may remain unbroken from him. So sin, in short, is breaking God's commandments, with the result of us having that direct connection with him broken.

Of course, we all easily fail at following God countless times in our lives, even the most righteous of us. We all sin. We all fall short on account of our imperfection and therefore we have placed ourselves on a path doomed to be forever removed from God.

(Actually, that's what hell really is. The pain and torture and horror of it is just our souls having a complete disconnect from God, our life source, for eternity. It would be like a fish suffocating without its needed water forever, never being able to satisfy its gills with air or skin with moist water. It just lies there on dry ground forever tortured. It doesn't have what it desperately needs to be truly alive.)

(Getting close to answering your questions, I just have to lay down some initial concepts.) So here we are, now guilty of breaking his commandments. We are all screwed because we no longer have that connection. God, of course realizes our situation, and knows that we are weak and very fallible. His desire to be connected with us, and his desire for us not to be doomed forever in pain is strong enough that he, himself chooses to solve the problem of our sin and do the work to rebridge that gap. Why does God do it? Because we are not able to restore the connection. For one thing, we still have patches of grime that is sin on our souls. We still have that poison. Second, we don't have the means to clean or remove the sin from ourselves. But God does. He provides an answer.

His answer is to be born and live on earth as a man named Yeshua (Jesus). Then he was to be crucified eventually, only living to be barely over 30 and then to come back after dying. This sounds like a strange answer, and it really is, because it's not something any human could do, and it was a one time occurance. Although Jesus' life was extremely significant with his teachings and miracles, his real purpose and significance on earth was his death. Why would God let his own son, a part of himself who he loved, be killed???? And how the heck does that do anything for solving our screwup of sin?

Well, first, it must be understood that God is just. All of our sins was a breaking of his law that he established. Just as most everyone would expect someone who is guilty of stealing, or killing etc to be punished for breaking a law here on earth, in our own courts, so does God require punishment or consequence for the breaking of his laws. He cannot just sweep people's sins under a rug and not deal with them, especially since sin, as long as it's around is a detriment. His esteem is too high and won't allow himself to be exploited by having people disrespect him and sinning freely without him doing anything about it. That would show that he doesn't care if we sin, it would show he has weak, or no standards. And again, by default, he couldn't remain as God if he just lets loose. If he lets evil pass him on by. After all, he is superior to us, to everything, and does not deserve to be in such a position of being taken advantage of with the very beings he created. And again, sin is like a spiritual disease that needs to be neutralized. So this is why punishment must be allocated by God towards the sins that we committed. His justice must be realized and satisfied. Ok, so you hopefully understand why God's justice is necessary. Why a punishment is necessary. But why direct it towards Jesus, a very part of himself?

Well, because it can't be us. Again, we don't have the means. Jesus' death was two-fold, in that he endured and satisfied God's wrath and justice, and at the same time, neutralized all sin. He drew all the sins of past, present, and future people (including you and I) to himself, held the burden and paid for each one. The load of that burden is beyond comprehension to me. How he took on so much of that is incredible. So he took on that sin which meant, that after he died on the cross, he was cut off from God the father and was in hell (remember a place completely removed from God) for a short time. Now at this point is where a distinction can be made of why Jesus had the means to atone for the our sins, but we can't, at least if we were to rejoin with God in paradise. If it were us, we'd be in hell, cut off from God, and we'd remain there forever. Why? Because the wages and punishment for sin is death (a more literal translation from Greek of what death in this context means is separation from God, or without our source of life) We would be unable to overcome death. Jesus could because he is all powerful and CAN overcome death! He was able to bare that temporary separation. After all, he is part of God. And God is self-sufficient. So since God is in him, he was able to persist even though in hell, and eventually rise again. It's like if you were to take a plant and divide it and plant each part in separate areas, both would still live on. That's like God and Jesus. But we would be like a leaf that fell off from the main plant that would just shrivel and die. This is how Jesus death was necessary and only way to pay for, and undo the sins that we committed. The sins were taken from our souls and he dealt with them.

So in short, sin is breaking God's commandments that he declared, so that we might not be broken from him and always have a connection with him. Of course, we have all screwed up, and so by doing so, we ARE separated and are on a path that, when we end here on earth, we will be forever removed from God completely. But God loves us enough, and also knows our situation that he himself will solve the problem of sin so that he can have that connection with us again, which means we can be in paradise. We are unable to neutralize sin. God had to because he can overcome death which is why he lived and died as Jesus. In this way, Jesus' blood being shed ensured us salvation forever if we commit to him. Because then Jesus sacrifice will be applied to us.

The reason why, in the old testament where God had his followers sacrifice animals has multiple layers to it. One, it was a sign and foreshadowing the future sacrifice of his son. Second, it was to show to all what sin resulted in, which is death, but God still loves his people enough to pass on the sacrifice. Third, to kill an animal and then burn it is not pleasant to witness and have to do, so it would make people more mindful of the consequences that sin brings. It served as a practice to atone sins until Jesus, the real lamb came at the appointed time to truly take care of all.

It was not meant to be barbaric or a pleasure kick for God. It was something serious that God didn't enjoy, nor the people, nor the animals who were chosen obviously. God's reasons on this were based out of love and desire for us not to suffer eternally when we die. He wanted us to be aware of what things and actions will make us imperfect if we carry them out. He did this because he wanted the best for us.

Many people complain about how God is cruel and intolerant. But on the contrary, when we screwed up our entire salvation, God himself took it upon himself to serve us on earth, to suffer and die, and take ALL the punishment we deserve. And why? Because he loves us and just desires for us to be happy and reach paradise to be with him.

I hope this makes sense to you. It turned out to be MUCH longer than I thought it would be when I started. Oh well. I'll clarify any parts to you if any of it was unclear.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 01:01 AM
link   
Yes, VadyV, I obviously took, “The first one I always get the same lame answer and bible verse quoted which does/explains nothing! The second one is always skipped over and not mentioned at all!” out of context. No, as a matter of fact, I did not. You wrote, I read.

Has it never crossed your mind that we sinned the very same sin Lucifer was guilty of, yet we were not automatically condemned to Hell? Satan and his angelic followers will pay their own debt, but God had a plan for us, so that if we go to Him as our Father, we needn’t die. The debt was made and it had to be paid. The blood of the animals was symbolic of the blood of the Son. You continue to be more concerned about the deaths of the animals than the death of the totally innocent Son of God, Who died for your sins so that you would not have to pay the wages of sin, but actually have eternal life. It seems to me that there is a problem, but it isn’t with the expectations of the Creator of the Universe but in the heart of a prideful and rebellious creation.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 01:08 AM
link   
Good answer, Raw, had I read through the entire thread I wouldn't have answered myself.

The Bible is a Mystery, according to the Bible. The Holy Spirit dwelling within the child of God (All aren't children of God, those who submit themselves to Christ and receive the Holy Spirit are) will assist the believer as the he studies and dwells on the Word. So, it seems clear to me what is the thing to do, prioritarily speaking - accept Christ. Two birds will be killed with one stone; eternal salvation and the Holy Spirit to guide you through life and the Bible.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 01:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by KidfingerAlso, God doesnt already know whats going to happen in the future. How could he/she if we all have free will adn are able to choose our own destiny in life?


Your answer is not only the most reasoned, it is rarely stated, and least rebutted that I have ever come across, on the internet or in live discussions. Why? because the logic is flawless, in that: God created man in perfection, yet tempted him by placing a forbidden fruit within his midst, and further allowed for one of his higher creations to be able to challenge him. God could have made man to stay perfect, all he needed to do was to not place the forbidden fruit on earth, and not provide man with the faculties to kick in even if that fruit was not hidden.

We are further asked to subscribe to the belief that man, although given this free will, is destined to meet a horrible end at the hand of God. This only denotes that God foresaw the end when he created man knowing full well that he created a being to be severely punished. Compounding that, the majority of the old texts, tell us that God chose one specific people, and regardless of what they do and how they behave they are his chosen, thereby excluding all else not born into that line. Later, we are led to believe that he sent his son and unless you believe in him, no one, including those chosen by God himself as his favoured children, will not be saved.

The end result therefore, is that the favoured children already being steadfast in their not accepting the son will perish despite God's word, and only those accepting the son will find everlasting life. Of those, the numbers have already been determined supposedly, and obviously the names, and faces, the date it will happen and the duration of the event.

In essence then, the free will was pre-destined to be wrought with failure culminating in an end where billions since the beginning of time, suffer a horrible death and eternity. Were the scriptures the word of man's creator, it is more likely that he would have created us to learn, grow, reason and gain the knowledge that would eventually lead all of man to understand him and love him unconditionally.

Considering that all God had to do was create man without the temptation, the inability to awaken to the knowledge of the fruit, and to not create or remove the impediment between him and man, we are instead force fed some notion as to how we have to jump through hoops to reverse the knowledge Eve gained to get back to the knowledge she supposedly never knew she had before she ate of the fruit.

He not only only gave us free will, he let loose our stupidity, by believing that was his plan.


[edit on 11/1/04 by SomewhereinBetween]



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 01:47 AM
link   
LadyV. When I lived in Utah, I went to St Josephs Catholic in Ogden. No I am not Catholic nor religious.

Father Devlin posed this question.

If you stumbled upon a group of 'heathens' sacrificing a young person to a volcano, she was screaming and crying, would you save her?


My answer was of course I would.

But then I learned that I just sentenced that woman to hell. In her religion the only way she could get to her heaven was to be sacrificed.

So in one religion sacrifice is the path. In others it is not. Which is right?

It really does not matter because the Mormons will baptise you after you die anyway. So sin away!



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 03:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween

Originally posted by KidfingerAlso, God doesnt already know whats going to happen in the future. How could he/she if we all have free will adn are able to choose our own destiny in life?


Your answer is not only the most reasoned, it is rarely stated, and least rebutted that I have ever come across, on the internet or in live discussions. Why? because the logic is flawless, in that: God created man in perfection, yet tempted him by placing a forbidden fruit within his midst, and further allowed for one of his higher creations to be able to challenge him. God could have made man to stay perfect, all he needed to do was to not place the forbidden fruit on earth, and not provide man with the faculties to kick in even if that fruit was not hidden.

We are further asked to subscribe to the belief that man, although given this free will, is destined to meet a horrible end at the hand of God. This only denotes that God foresaw the end when he created man knowing full well that he created a being to be severely punished. Compounding that, the majority of the old texts, tell us that God chose one specific people, and regardless of what they do and how they behave they are his chosen, thereby excluding all else not born into that line. Later, we are led to believe that he sent his son and unless you believe in him, no one, including those chosen by God himself as his favoured children, will not be saved.

The end result therefore, is that the favoured children already being steadfast in their not accepting the son will perish despite God's word, and only those accepting the son will find everlasting life. Of those, the numbers have already been determined supposedly, and obviously the names, and faces, the date it will happen and the duration of the event.

In essence then, the free will was pre-destined to be wrought with failure culminating in an end where billions since the beginning of time, suffer a horrible death and eternity. Were the scriptures the word of man's creator, it is more likely that he would have created us to learn, grow, reason and gain the knowledge that would eventually lead all of man to understand him and love him unconditionally.

Considering that all God had to do was create man without the temptation, the inability to awaken to the knowledge of the fruit, and to not create or remove the impediment between him and man, we are instead force fed some notion as to how we have to jump through hoops to reverse the knowledge Eve gained to get back to the knowledge she supposedly never knew she had before she ate of the fruit.

He not only only gave us free will, he let loose our stupidity, by believing that was his plan.


[edit on 11/1/04 by SomewhereinBetween]


I'm pretty sure He sees the future. I believe we were given the free will in order to be able to seek forgivness by our own free will. Had God made Adam and never given him a free will he would have followed his 'programming' and been close to God not by his own will. I believe the point of the whole thing is that you must want to be saved. After all if you love someone you want to give them the best gift you can. What's a better gift to give someone than ability to make his own choices? You know, if you love someone set them free. That spells unconditional love like nothing else to me.

To LadV: It's very hard to answers question of faith to someone who believes differently. The Bible is the word of the christian God. So it doesn't really make sense to dismiss it.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween

Originally posted by KidfingerAlso, God doesnt already know whats going to happen in the future. How could he/she if we all have free will adn are able to choose our own destiny in life?


Your answer is not only the most reasoned, it is rarely stated, and least rebutted that I have ever come across, on the internet or in live discussions. Why? because the logic is flawless, in that: God created man in perfection, yet tempted him by placing a forbidden fruit within his midst, and further allowed for one of his higher creations to be able to challenge him. God could have made man to stay perfect, all he needed to do was to not place the forbidden fruit on earth, and not provide man with the faculties to kick in even if that fruit was not hidden.


Sorry. But it is flawed and has been refuted here on ATS previously.

What the original poster doesn't take into account is the idea that although there may be infinite destinies, Freewill allows man to follow the path of those destinies. But who is to say that God isn't aware of how all of those paths turn out? Maybe He knows exactly what will happen if you take path A, path B, path C and so on ad infinitum.

Man may be given Freewill to act as he pleases but it doesn't necessarily mean that the end result is unknowable to God. He wrote the rules, after all.

As for the Forbidden Fruit? Although I see the story of the Garden of Eden as an allegory for the creation of Freewill, why is it logical that God didn't have some purpose by making it available? If He had forced the fruit on Adam and Eve it wouldn't have been Freewill would it? By making it readily available, man was able to make his first choice. It doesn't mean that man was condemned - rather it means that we chose a path that led to an infinite number of others - all of which God may know the end result of.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 07:15 AM
link   
I don't see anything wrong with talking about the Bible without quoting it. In fact, I think it was designed to direct people how to think, not how to read. I'll try to answer both parts with my viewpoint:

Sacrifice is giving up something. It's easy to tell your friends you'd do anything for them, but quite another to actually do it. Back in the day livestock were a valuable resources. To lose a part of your resources is to give up a part of yourself. In doing so, you're showing a commitment. Kind of like a marriage. The couple compromises at times, gives up the 'single' way of living, and gives up their time to work and/or care for the family. It's all about giving. God thought the ultimate gift would be his son. Send him to earth to teach and get waxed in the worst way. It had to be hard to sit up there, watch that and not intervene but God understood this painful act would show us how much he truly cared about having a relationship with us.

A lot of us are bent on the idea that death is the end and the worst thing that could ever happen, but when you think of an eternity of happiness it seems more like a speedbump.

This leads me to animals and souls. Do they have them? I don't know. But if you believe yes, then wouldn't they absolutely be in heaven since they were being sacrificed to God? I don't know how an animal could be 'evil' but someone who has worked with them more could probably better answer that.

Any way you look at it, it's painful stuff. Painful to give, painful to die, but in the end there is reward in selflessness.

I hope it helps some, sorry if it's an answer you've heard before.

Question though: Why are people saying, "Because there is no God" on this thread? This has nothing to do with sacrifice and does not help answer the questions Lady V posted.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 08:51 AM
link   
Fundamentalist Christianity - fascinating. These people actually believe that the the world is 12,000 years old. Swear to God. Based on what? I asked them.

"Well we looked at all the people in the Bible and we added 'em up all the way back to Adam and Eve, their ages: 12,000 years."

Well how scientific, okay. I didn't know that you'd gone to so much trouble. That's good. You believe the world's 12,000 years old?

"That's right."

Okay, I got one word to ask you, a one word question, ready?

"Uh-huh."

Dinosaurs.

You know the world is 12,000 years old and dinosaurs existed, they existed in that time, you'd think it would have been mentioned in the Bible at some point.

"And lo Jesus and the disciples walked to Nazareth. But the trail was blocked by a giant brontosaurus... with a splinter in his paw. And O the disciples did run a shriekin': 'What a big fing lizard, Lord!' But Jesus was unafraid and he took the splinter from the brontosaurus's paw and the big lizard became his friend.

"And Jesus sent him to Scotland where he lived in a loch for O so many years inviting thousands of American tourists to bring their fat families and their fat dollar bills.

"And oh Scotland did praise the Lord. Thank you Lord, thank you Lord. Thank you Lord



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Question though: Why are people saying, "Because there is no God" on this thread? This has nothing to do with sacrifice and does not help answer the questions Lady V posted.


It's relevant to the questions perhaps because many non believers, who consider religion a means of control.. see things like sacrifices as another control techinique; a test of loyalty and submision to an authority. If someone's kid is to be sacrified [in any of the old religions] and a parent protests.. their loyalty may be called into question and they could risk being charged with heracy.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 10:37 AM
link   
[deleted double post]

[edit on 1-11-2004 by riley]



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 03:00 PM
link   

SZTICKS- I'm pretty sure He sees the future. I believe we were given the free will in order to be able to seek forgiveness by our own free will. Had God made Adam and never given him a free will he would have followed his 'programming' and been close to God not by his own will.
The ultimate faith based argument in play, as with this:

LEVELLER- Freewill allows man to follow the path of those destinies….If He had forced the fruit on Adam and Eve it wouldn't have been Freewill would it?


And no Leveller, the argument has not been refuted in here or otherwise, and certainly not within the words above. Your idea of a refutation rests solely on the basis that God created man for no purpose whatsoever but to adore him and serve him, and decided that it became necessary for man to want to do that of their own accord, and if not suffer terrible inflictions. The basis behind free will lies with the ability to reason and think for oneself, which is not incorporated into the religious doctrine that free will tells you you have a choice of God’s way or the highway and he demands that you choose his way or be doomed. That is fear and nothing else, and fear to control your mind.

The simple fact remains that the omnipotent one in your eyes has decided that he needed to be worshipped and chose to create and destroy billions of creatures just so he can one day put an end to it when he has achieved the adoring numbers he is in search of. The idea that you are told about your impending destruction because man has failed him, save for that select bunch is unadulterated hogwash, in that it presupposes a vain, cruel and very jealous God who being the highest and purest form of good and power should have absolutely no need to have subservient beings at his feet. That is what you will never understand, not because you can’t, but because you need to find illogical and circular answers to appease yourself that if you dare think otherwise you just might end up in hell in the event the story is true.

I am convinced that the soteriological crowd have not spent anytime whatsoever ever questioning if what they read has in fact any basis in fact, and have not invested any time to question the teachings of the clergy who tell them how the Bible is to be read and interpreted, or have they read the accounts of other writings and tried to understand why they differ so; why the words in the Bible has undergone so many changes; why the old Hebrew myths and text remnants differ in their accounting of the OT as is known today; why the rare historical documents from the world as it was known from 300BCE to 100CE are used in support of non-religious history at that time, but is shucked aside, and for the most part hidden away from the masses when they do not corroborate divine history. Nor can any of you explain the blatant inconsistencies in Genesis alone, never mind the rest of the 65 books unless you revert back to the nonsense of: The Bible proves The Bible. And worse is how the target is forever changing when it comes to the end times. The Jews were all aghast when the temple fell, they firmly believed the world was going to end, but that didn’t happen, and as long as that doesn’t happen the excuse continues on down through the ages, as if it is some sort of proof that the story behind revelations still stands.


By making it readily available, man was able to make his first choice. It doesn't mean that man was condemned
So then are you telling us that The Bible which you are arguing is the word of God, has not been honest as to what will happen to those who do not swear allegiance to Christ? Why am I not surprised? It is after all the words which all faith pushers will choose to manipulate to suit their own purposes as they deem it necessary to satisfy themselves of their salvation, you’re not doing anything that the Churches aren’t also.

The undeniable and provable fact remains: No one can explain why the Almighty, all powerful creator of the heavens and all in it, would have the need to create a being to love him unconditionally. And The Bible tells you so, is nothing but a circular answer.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyV
I have two questions...I have asked them before, here and other places. The first one I always get the same lame answer and bible verse quoted which does/explains nothing! The second one is always skipped over and not mentioned at all!

1) Why would someone have to die for anyone else's' sins? This makes no sense what so ever. How does someone dying make it any easier for someone to be forgiven?
2) Why did an omnipotent god need an animal killed, sacrificed to him? Did it have anything to do with the energy released from this animal at the time of it's death? That something needed and used (feed of off) that energy at certain times. It makes no sense that an omnipotent, almighty god would need something killed for it!

EDIT: to correct spelling goofs

Very good questions -

I believe, from what I have read and studied about the bible and behavior of man through philosophy, etc. that it's not a matter of "have to" , it's more a matter of wanted to. I believe that the biggest sacrafice would be life - whether it be animal or man. But in the old testament it was animals, although God did ask for a boy to be sacraficed and stopped it before it could take place. Unfortunately I think that people (man) has taken the bible and totally used it (or religion) to control people - most definately, because religion is powerful - but don't forget that man doesn't only use religion to control people - he will use society, technology, government and other things; then when it looks like he can't control through these means, he will pull religion out of his hat.

I am a Christian, however I am not religious. I stand up for what I believe, but do not expect another person to believe the same. I don't condemn others for what they believe, nor should any other human being. I hate religion itself because religion comes from man and mans ideals; however Christianity comes from God.


[edit on 10/31/2004 by LadyV]



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
And no Leveller, the argument has not been refuted in here or otherwise, and certainly not within the words above. Your idea of a refutation rests solely on the basis that God created man for no purpose whatsoever but to adore him and serve him..........



No it doesn't. Who knows why God created man? He may have reasons that are beyond our comprehension.
The problem is that you are making the classic mistake of giving God human characteristics and human motives.

But in fact, I would think the opposite would apply in reference to your above statement. If God wanted man for no purpose other than to serve Him, he wouldn't have given him Freewill would He? He wouldn't have given man a choice to be able to turn away from Him.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join