Does God and his --- Obey or Die law--- say that Christians are to be slaves forever?

WarminIndy

Greatest I am

AfterInfinity
reply to post by NewAgeMan

 

So you're just going.to ignore the scripture in the op?

Theists have to ignore much of scriptures and their own morality to be able to stomach their genocidal son murdering God.

Regards
DL

I see that anti-theists ignore scripture, to ignore their own mortality. What part of "Jesus is God" and came as a man do you have trouble with? You claim God was genocidal in killing His Son, and yet you don't cross that bridge that Jesus came into this world knowing the purpose for His coming. It wasn't like He was unaware.

What you think is genocide, is His own self-sacrifice. Why ignore the scriptures that teach that? Oh, I suppose it would make you a theist if you didn't ignore them.

The genocide was the one in Noah's day fool.

As to Jesus, as I said, your morals have been corrupted to the point where you embrace human sacrifice and a God whose justice can be bribed. But don't think about that. Just think of how your free ticket to heaven was paid for.

I am not an atheist so keep your atheist garbage to yourself but Satan and Christians want atheists to embrace barbaric human sacrifice and the notion that we should profit from punishing the innocent instead of the guilty and here you are preaching for Satan. Shame on you.

In reality, if God did demand such a barbaric sacrifice, he would be sinning.

He would know that barbaric human sacrifice is immoral.

You do too. Right?

Those with good morals will know that no noble and gracious God would demand the sacrifice of a so called son just to prove it's benevolence.

When you die, Satan will ask you; How was your ticket to heaven purchased? With innocent blood?

When you say yes, you become his.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am

WarminIndy
reply to post by Greatest I am

 

They were murdered by neglect?

If you recall, they did have access to the tree of life before and didn't eat from it and were never commanded not to...so too bad so sad on their part.

Murder by neglect? From the Garden and now had to work? Do you equate working to being murdered by God?

They became slaves to the ground, of which their bread would come from. They became slaves to the work of their own hands and the sweat of their brow. When does that ever end? Oh yes, in the end.

If God wanted, He could have made the earth not produce anything, but He didn't, so man still was able to eat. You are a slave to the sweat of your brow until someone else does it for you or you die.

What do you have against not being a kept pet?
Do you resent having to be as man so much child?
Don't be afraid to grow up.

You are right that they had access to the tree of life before God reneged and locked it away and thus insured that A & E died. If that is not murder to you then you show how your religion has corrupted your morals.

Regards
DL

A kept pet...I have a pet, does he know he is kept? No, he's just happy to get food and to sleep by me. We are a pack, you know. Does he work for his dog food? No. But I don't neglect him either. But mankind should be a kept pet?

Wow, I'm not grown up. Do you think it is wrong to work like a man to support children, so they can eat? Tell it to children that they are kept pets and to grow up. Wait, isn't that called being a slacker?

Maybe God was letting Adam and Eve know that they aren't teenagers any more and to get off their rears and do something useful. Oh no, that would be neglect on God's part, God would be charged with child abuse for expecting His teenagers to get out and work.

You seem to not be able to grasp the practical messages in the Bible. Can you tell us why you were expected to work once you became an adult? Was society cruel and neglectful to you in expecting you to do something? Or are you one of those with an "entitlement" mentality that expects God to just give and give and give without any responsibility on your part?

That's the real Jewish idea in the story of Genesis. You are a man, so work like a man. That's just one moral lesson in the story, because it is a universal theme.

nvm

reply to post by Greatest I am


That is like saying "Satan save us, God is beating up on me, big bully God".

If Satan were so concerned, then why didn't Satan sacrifice himself? No wait, it was Satan who was saying "you can go ahead and eat free forever, don't worry, I got it for you". Did Satan pay the bar tab?

That's funny, the one saying you should keep getting it all free, wasn't the one who paid the ticket for you to ride...

reply to post by WarminIndy

That's funny, the one saying you should keep getting it all free, wasn't the one who paid the ticket for you to ride...

If God were truly concerned, he would have erased Satan from the script. Poof! Gone. No more evil archnemesis. It would have been like D-Day, only instead, it would have been D-Millisecond. Because that's how long it would have taken to drag the serpent out and vaporize it with a thought.

So what's his excuse? Oh, that's right, he has no excuse. Instead of vaporizing Satan, he chose to sacrifice his only son in the most horrific manner possible and still lose 90% of his most prized creation. Instead of walking across the street to his girlfriend's place, he took a walk downtown and picked a fight with a biker gang before robbing a bank and going to prison for a few months, then made his way back to his girlfriend's house. There's a certain point at which "doing things the hard way" becomes "stalling like a mofo".

He doesn't want Satan dead. Why? That's the question you should be asking. But you won't.

AfterInfinity
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

That's funny, the one saying you should keep getting it all free, wasn't the one who paid the ticket for you to ride...

If God were truly concerned, he would have erased Satan from the script. Poof! Gone. No more evil archnemesis. It would have been like D-Day, only instead, it would have been D-Millisecond. Because that's how long it would have taken to drag the serpent out and vaporize it with a thought.

So what's his excuse? Oh, that's right, he has no excuse. Instead of vaporizing Satan, he chose to sacrifice his only son in the most horrific manner possible and still lose 90% of his most prized creation. Instead of walking across the street to his girlfriend's place, he took a walk downtown and picked a fight with a biker gang before robbing a bank and going to prison for a few months, then made his way back to his girlfriend's house. There's a certain point at which "doing things the hard way" becomes "stalling like a mofo".

He doesn't want Satan dead. Why? That's the question you should be asking. But you won't.

edit on 25-11-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

Why does Satan bother you?

If Satan is not real, then Satan shouldn't hold any power of ideology over you.

And let's address the flood, of which the God of the Bible gets the most charge for...

Flood Myths From Around The World

How many of these gods should also be called genocidal? But it seems the God of the Bible takes all the blame, and yet the Hebrews writing about it were not the first.

From Greece

Zeus sent a flood to destroy the men of the Bronze Age. Prometheus advised his son Deucalion to build a chest. All other men perished except for a few who escaped to high mountains. The mountains in Thessaly were parted, and all the world beyond the Isthmus and Peloponnese was overwhelmed. Deucalion and his wife Pyrrha (daughter of Epimetheus and Pandora), after floating in the chest for nine days and nights, landed on Parnassus. When the rains ceased, he sacrificed to Zeus, the God of Escape. At the bidding of Zeus, he threw stones over his head; they became men, and the stones which Pyrrha threw became women. That is why people are called laoi, from laas, "a stone." [Apollodorus, 1.7.2]

Zeus is genocidal...

At the end of the past kalpa, the demon Hayagriva stole the sacred books from Brahma, and the whole human race became corrupt except the seven Nishis, and especially Satyavrata, the prince of a maritime region. One day when he was bathing in a river, he was visited by a fish which craved protection and which he transferred to successively larger vessels as it grew. At last Satyavrata recognized it as the god Vishnu, "The Lord of the Universe." Vishnu told him that in seven days all the corrupt creatures will be destroyed by a deluge, but Satyavrata would be saved in a large vessel. He was told to take aboard the miraculous vessel all kinds of medicinal herbs, food esculant grains, the seven Nishis and their wives, and pairs of brute animals. After seven days, the oceans began to overflow the coasts and constant rain began flooding the earth. A large vessel floated in on the rising waters, and Satyavrata and the Nishis entered with their wives and cargo. During the deluge, Vishnu preserved the ark by again taking the form of a giant fish and tying the ark to himself with a huge sea serpent. When the waters subsided, he slew the demon who had stolen the holy books and communicated their contents to Satyavrata. [H. Miller, pp. 289-290; Howey, pp. 389-390; Frazer, pp. 191-193]

Vishnu is genocidal...

Sing Bonga created man from the dust of the ground, but they soon grew wicked and lazy, would not wash, and spent all their time dancing and singing. Sing Bonga regretted creating them and resolved to destroy them by flood. He sent a stream of fire-water (Sengle-Daa) from heaven, and all people died save a brother and sister who had hidden beneath a tiril tree (hence tiril wood is black and charred today). God thought better of his deed and created the snake Lurbing to stop the fiery rain. This snake held up the showers by puffing up its soul into the shape of a rainbow. Now Mundas associate the rainbow with Lurbing destroying the rain. [Frazer, p. 196]

Sing Bonga was genocidal...

In every flood story is the concept of great wickedness on the part of humanity, but yet only Yaweh gets the blame. Why is that?

And the critics of Yaweh blame Him for Satan, and no one cares to look at these other earlier flood stories, accusing Yaweh of genocide and incapable of stopping the devil. Why so much effort against Yaweh, anyway? Is there something so special about Yaweh that people have to keep pointing to? And yet a devil has appeared in all religions, even prior to Judaism and Christianity.

The Devil and Demons In Other Religions

Why didn't Ra destroy Set or Nehebkau?

Why didn't Odin destroy Loki?

Why didn't Ahura Mazda destroy Ahiram?

Why didn't Vishnu and Krishna destroy Ravana or Rakshasas?

Why is every religion based on the struggle between good and evil? And yet Yaweh is charged repeatedly? Does Yaweh hold special significance that He alone must be treated this way? All religions also talk about the end, when their devils will be destroyed. Shambhala, Ragnarok and Apocalypse, all final battles. Maybe it is for the individual, when they finally overcome the evil in them.

reply to post by WarminIndy


Because it's one more telltale sign of the sort of character my fellow man has chosen to idolize. And that which they idolize, they emulate.

AfterInfinity
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

Because it's one more telltale sign of the sort of character my fellow man has chosen to idolize. And that which they idolize, they emulate.

And people choose to emulate the diabolic, because they idolize it as well.

You know this as well as I.

Are you willing to see that Stalin was idolized, Hitler was idolized, Phol Pot was idolized? All of these idolized something else besides God and emulated that something else. Could it be their own self-exalted power and sense of absolute that led them in their destruction as well?

Can you tell me why Confucious said this

Men's natures are alike, it is their habits that carry them far apart.

If it is the human nature that is the same, but only habits that separate them, then intrinsically, it is the human flaw to be genocidal and then blame it on God. And it is a flaw to not recognize human nature.

But compare this to Marquis De Sade

Lust's passion will be served; it demands, it militates, it tyrannizes.

What is the difference in these two men? Marquis De Sade believes primal natural lust without God tyrannizes and he is the one Sadism is named for, the belief in inflicting pain upon others.

The difference in these two men, Confucious believed in the Mandate of Heaven, the Marquis de Sade didn't and through their practices, went in different directions. Would you care that we should all be the Marquis in belief and practice?

reply to post by WarminIndy


Yep. All those people were idolized. So what does that mean for God, huh? Or is he the exception? Is that your brain talking, or your heart? Is that what you see, or what you want?

You just listed a bunch of really bad people who so easily captured the hearts of the people. Couldn't it be the same way with God? I think it is. I really think it is.

Can you be honest with yourself long enough to really look at this guy? Strategically speaking, he's a military mastermind. He could get an entire nation to commit suicide if he wanted to. Is that someone I can trust? No. Is that someone I want my fellow man to idolize? Hell no. Is that someone who could mean the weaponization of our species? Absolutely.

And that's what I'm afraid of. Because it's happened before.

AfterInfinity
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

Yep. All those people were idolized. So what does that mean for God, huh? Or is he the exception? Is that your brain talking, or your heart? Is that what you see, or what you want?

You just listed a bunch of really bad people who so easily captured the hearts of the people. Couldn't it be the same way with God? I think it is. I really think it is.

Can you be honest with yourself long enough to really look at this guy? Strategically speaking, he's a military mastermind. He could get an entire nation to commit suicide if he wanted to. Is that someone I can trust? No. Is that someone I want my fellow man to idolize? Hell no. Is that someone who could mean the weaponization of our species? Absolutely.

And that's what I'm afraid of. Because it's happened before.

edit on 25-11-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

Why do you keep placing that burden on God?

It is as though you are afraid of God more than people. But you never say the good things Christians have done in His name, that is never brought up.

But think about it, all these hospitals and charities done in His name, don't you think it is possible for people to emulate the goodness of God? All you see is the bad things people have done, but I never hear about the good things.

Mother Theresa could hardly be accused of being weaponized when she embraced the Untouchables. What's wrong with her emulation?

WarminIndy

Greatest I am

WarminIndy
reply to post by Greatest I am

 

They were murdered by neglect?

If you recall, they did have access to the tree of life before and didn't eat from it and were never commanded not to...so too bad so sad on their part.

Murder by neglect? From the Garden and now had to work? Do you equate working to being murdered by God?

They became slaves to the ground, of which their bread would come from. They became slaves to the work of their own hands and the sweat of their brow. When does that ever end? Oh yes, in the end.

If God wanted, He could have made the earth not produce anything, but He didn't, so man still was able to eat. You are a slave to the sweat of your brow until someone else does it for you or you die.

What do you have against not being a kept pet?
Do you resent having to be as man so much child?
Don't be afraid to grow up.

You are right that they had access to the tree of life before God reneged and locked it away and thus insured that A & E died. If that is not murder to you then you show how your religion has corrupted your morals.

Regards
DL

A kept pet...I have a pet, does he know he is kept? No, he's just happy to get food and to sleep by me. We are a pack, you know. Does he work for his dog food? No. But I don't neglect him either. But mankind should be a kept pet?

Wow, I'm not grown up. Do you think it is wrong to work like a man to support children, so they can eat? Tell it to children that they are kept pets and to grow up. Wait, isn't that called being a slacker?

Maybe God was letting Adam and Eve know that they aren't teenagers any more and to get off their rears and do something useful. Oh no, that would be neglect on God's part, God would be charged with child abuse for expecting His teenagers to get out and work.

You seem to not be able to grasp the practical messages in the Bible. Can you tell us why you were expected to work once you became an adult? Was society cruel and neglectful to you in expecting you to do something? Or are you one of those with an "entitlement" mentality that expects God to just give and give and give without any responsibility on your part?

That's the real Jewish idea in the story of Genesis. You are a man, so work like a man. That's just one moral lesson in the story, because it is a universal theme.

I have no problem with the Jewish view of Eden being where man was elevated so I agree with your stance on growing up.

That does not explain away that from the Christian POV, man fell nor does it explain why God murdered A & E through neglect for elevating mankind nor why he is such a genocidal son murdering prick.

Regards
DL

WarminIndy
reply to post by Greatest I am

 

That is like saying "Satan save us, God is beating up on me, big bully God".

If Satan were so concerned, then why didn't Satan sacrifice himself? No wait, it was Satan who was saying "you can go ahead and eat free forever, don't worry, I got it for you". Did Satan pay the bar tab?

That's funny, the one saying you should keep getting it all free, wasn't the one who paid the ticket for you to ride...

You might want to quote what you are speaking to. I have no idea what you are on about as you do not have any quote.

I think you are embracing the barbaric human sacrifice of Jesus and the notion that you should accept a free ride into heaven at the cost of the torture and death of an innocent man. And you think that moral do you?

I am not an atheist but Satan and Christians want atheists to embrace barbaric human sacrifice and the notion that we should profit from punishing the innocent instead of the guilty and here you are preaching for Satan. Shame on you.

In reality, if God did demand such a barbaric sacrifice, he would be sinning.

He would know that barbaric human sacrifice is immoral.

You do too. Right?

Those with good morals will know that no noble and gracious God would demand the sacrifice of a so called son just to prove it's benevolence.

When you die, Satan will ask you; How was your ticket to heaven purchased? With innocent blood?

When you say yes, you become his.

Regards
DL

AfterInfinity
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

Because it's one more telltale sign of the sort of character my fellow man has chosen to idolize. And that which they idolize, they emulate.

You have to admit that his was a great deflection though.

He talk about anything and everything but the issues you raised.

That is skill.

Regards
DL

reply to post by WarminIndy

Why do you keep placing that burden on God?

If anyone is responsible for anything, it is God. You cannot name God as ruler of the universe and in the same breath exempt him from all accountability. But I can see why you would want to. Kinda ruins the illusion, doesn't it? You want him for the romance, not for the realism.

AfterInfinity
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

Why do you keep placing that burden on God?

If anyone is responsible for anything, it is God. You cannot name God as ruler of the universe and in the same breath exempt him from all accountability. But I can see why you would want to. Kinda ruins the illusion, doesn't it? You want him for the romance, not for the realism.

edit on 26-11-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

I didn't name God as ruler of the universe.

But you are kind of saying, "Mom and dad, you are responsible for my bad nature, therefore any actions from here on out on my part, you take accountability for".

Can I ask this though, why are you asking me and not actually God? You seem to demand a lot of accountability for something you don't believe in. Either God is real, therefore able to be accountable by you, or He is not and then can't be accountable to you in any way. So which is it, is God real or not?

Then we can move forward from there, because I can't defend a God you don't believe in. And you can't charge a God you don't believe in. So do you believe in the God of the Bible, or not?

Greatest I am

WarminIndy
reply to post by Greatest I am

 

That is like saying "Satan save us, God is beating up on me, big bully God".

If Satan were so concerned, then why didn't Satan sacrifice himself? No wait, it was Satan who was saying "you can go ahead and eat free forever, don't worry, I got it for you". Did Satan pay the bar tab?

That's funny, the one saying you should keep getting it all free, wasn't the one who paid the ticket for you to ride...

You might want to quote what you are speaking to. I have no idea what you are on about as you do not have any quote.

I think you are embracing the barbaric human sacrifice of Jesus and the notion that you should accept a free ride into heaven at the cost of the torture and death of an innocent man. And you think that moral do you?

I am not an atheist but Satan and Christians want atheists to embrace barbaric human sacrifice and the notion that we should profit from punishing the innocent instead of the guilty and here you are preaching for Satan. Shame on you.

In reality, if God did demand such a barbaric sacrifice, he would be sinning.

He would know that barbaric human sacrifice is immoral.

You do too. Right?

Those with good morals will know that no noble and gracious God would demand the sacrifice of a so called son just to prove it's benevolence.

When you die, Satan will ask you; How was your ticket to heaven purchased? With innocent blood?

When you say yes, you become his.

Regards
DL

And that's what you fail to understand, Jesus offered Himself. Would you then call His own self-sacrifice barbaric?

You know, for every person who runs into buildings to save others, every person who jumps into rivers to pull out drowning children and every person who jumps in the line of fire, they should all be considered barbaric sacrifices, because no one can offer themselves to save another, is that right?

reply to post by WarminIndy

But you are kind of saying, "Mom and dad, you are responsible for my bad nature, therefore any actions from here on out on my part, you take accountability for".

My mom and dad weren't all-powerful and omniscient. Once again, omitting the critical details here. You should try harder.

Can I ask this though, why are you asking me and not actually God? You seem to demand a lot of accountability for something you don't believe in. Either God is real, therefore able to be accountable by you, or He is not and then can't be accountable to you in any way. So which is it, is God real or not?

Why is this so hard to grasp? People emulate what they admire. They admire god, they emulate god. And that turns everyone into a gigantic lot of assholes. Hence the modern world.

reply to post by Greatest I am


To me, the power of the universe in the creation that is happening right now has to be created because nature acts according to time. So to learn or understand that, whether you want to be dark or light is free rather than to perceive reality in the delusion of ego.

AfterInfinity


If anyone is responsible for anything, it is God.

Yes ...you are correct. God is responsible (in both meanings) for everything.

AfterInfinity
You cannot name God as ruler of the universe and in the same breath exempt him from all accountability.

correct again however God is not accountable for what a "man" does..the man is.Everyone is 100% accountable for ALL they do.There are no pardons from "guilt" ...Christianity teaches God is pardoning everyone from their guilt if they believe a religious doctrine by "forgiveness" and that is not true in the least.

Gods forgiveness means "freedom from bondage"(of the imperfect nature of man..immaturity)..and it's part of a process not an event.It falls under the process of "salvation"/deliverance....growth..all the religious rhetoric is false.

reply to post by Rex282


So in your opinion, the scientist who created Frankenstein was innocent?