*** 11th fact *** about GOD - revealed by the LAST End Time Prophet Matt Marriott

[Nathan Poe]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil

there you go Juv.

I must say it was hilarious to see an agnostic having to explain the bible to him

Hilarious, but all too common on these boards.

 

[MoonLancer]

The meaning of peace belongs to this case. (ain't broke, don't fix it).

god might be talking about genocide. to give piece is a common poetic term that can mean to give death.

Never wish for peace on earth!

 

[MaxP]

Fact I have a dirty tissue on my desk

Fact: at the time you made the first post, you had a clean tissue on your desk.

 

[pgp_protector]

Fact: at the time you made the first post, you had a clean tissue on your desk.

True, but it showed that Facts Change.
Others got it, but I guess it must be spelled out for some.

 

[MaxP]

True, but it showed that Facts Change.
Others got it, but I guess it must be spelled out for some.

Well, facts do not change. At whatever time you made the first post, a clean tissue was on your desk. That is a fact. That fact never changes. That fact also has little/no bearing on what will happen to the tissue after the first post. So facts are no just existent in terms of "I have a clean tissue" but also at what point you had the tissue. The fact you had the tissue at 12:15 PM, Sat., November 6(say), will never change. The fact could repeat over the next few minutes, hours, years, or millenia, but it does not change the point that the fact will never change, but that fact does not necessitate that it will repeat again.

Does that even make sense? lol

 

[juvenissun]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil

there you go Juv.

I must say it was hilarious to see an agnostic having to explain the bible to him

It is also enjoyable to watch the way that everything comes down to the definitions of words with him when he has been so easily manouvered into a deep hole of lose yet again.

It is like arguing with a physicist about the equation E=mc2 and then aguing about what the word "equals" really means.

Brilliant stuff.

You are hitting your own foot. Just take a browse of what's on the wikipedia, would you still think that the argument on the definition of evil is an unnecessary thing to do? If you see one [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] roach, there must be thousands somewhere close. So, what's on the wikipedia is only ONE of such interpretation. If you search the literature, then you will see people have studied this issue more than one thousand years.

Now, if anyone still thinks that the God "creates evil" verse is an easy one, which can be used to against God, then the person is obviously ignorant.

 

[juvenissun]

god might be talking about genocide. to give piece is a common poetic term that can mean to give death.

Never wish for peace on earth!

Here you go. You are learning.

 

[Baggins]

You are hitting your own foot. Just take a browse of what's on the wikipedia, would you still think that the argument on the definition of evil is an unnecessary thing to do? If you see one [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] roach, there must be thousands somewhere close. So, what's on the wikipedia is only ONE of such interpretation. If you search the literature, then you will see people have studied this issue more than one thousand years.

Now, if anyone still thinks that the God "creates evil" verse is an easy one, which can be used to against God, then the person is obviously ignorant.

Define ignorant.

Do you mean ignorant in the way that you were ignorant of the fact that god claims to have created evil in the bible?

 

[MaxP]

God didn't create evil. Evil is a lack of good, like darkness is a lack of light; both can be experienced, but neither is a force per se.

 

[MoonLancer]

but god says he created evil, which is also backed up by the fact he created the snake, and Lucifer.

 

[MaxP]

but god says he created evil, which is also backed up by the fact he created the snake, and Lucifer.

He created Lucifer, who was the brightest angel, and then Lucifer chose to not serve God. Lucifer is not "pure evil."
Lucifer is also the snake, they are not separate.

 

[Hespera]

He created Lucifer, who was the brightest angel, and then Lucifer chose to not serve God. Lucifer is not "pure evil."
Lucifer is also the snake, they are not separate.

The symbol of snake / serpent as Lucifer is pretty obvious.

I wondered though about the part where god condemns ALL snakes, and says that they are cursed? Have to crawl on their bellies and eat dust. That was hardly fair, to condemn and curse them all.

Of course real snakes do very well for themselves and dont need legs. Dont eat dust either and are only cursed in the sense that (some)people get weirded out by them.

 

[MaxP]

The symbol of snake / serpent as Lucifer is pretty obvious.

I wondered though about the part where god condemns ALL snakes, and says that they are cursed? Have to crawl on their bellies and eat dust. That was hardly fair, to condemn and curse them all.

Its quite possible that part is not literal, just as Lucifer was not literally a snake(most likely), but perhaps representative of a further punishment God could have inflicted upon Lucifer at that point. Like snakes could have had legs, and God could have taken 'em away, Lucifer could have had something taken by God, further.

Of course real snakes do very well for themselves and dont need legs. Dont eat dust either and are only cursed in the sense that (some)people get weirded out by them.

Snakes weird me out.

 

[juvenissun]

Define ignorant.

Do you mean ignorant in the way that you were ignorant of the fact that god claims to have created evil in the bible?

hey, I am good in giving definition. So, you won't get me by asking this type of question.

Ignorant means one is too lazy to get enough information so he can start to think. So that guy read the three words in the verse and thought he could get me by showing that to me. That is ignorant.

 

[Hespera]

Its quite possible that part is not literal, just as Lucifer was not literally a snake(most likely), but perhaps representative of a further punishment God could have inflicted upon Lucifer at that point. Like snakes could have had legs, and God could have taken 'em away, Lucifer could have had something taken by God, further.

Snakes weird me out.

>>>>>>Like snakes could have had legs, and God could have taken 'em away,<<<<<<

Just for fun I point out that some snakes actually do have legs... or at least a vestige of hind legs. like so..http://jenny.thegreenes.org/vestigal hips cindy.jpg. Pelvic bones and the femur only, which is the part you can see there. They all DID have legs, at least when their ancestors were a type of lizard.

All sorts of neat things to be learned in comparative anatomy class.

 

[JBJoe]

hey, I am good in giving definition. So, you won't get me by asking this type of question.

Ignorant means one is too lazy to get enough information so he can start to think. So that guy read the three words in the verse and thought he could get me by showing that to me. That is ignorant.

Ahhh, redefining the language is so much fun.

I can't wait to hear what your definition of 'is' is.

 

[Hespera]

Ahhh, redefining the language is so much fun.

I can't wait to hear what your definition of 'is' is.

What is "is"?
Is it
What IS is
or
What is IS?

Which is is it?

But

Should we not define definition first?

 

[MoonLancer]

He created Lucifer, who was the brightest angel, and then Lucifer chose to not serve God. Lucifer is not "pure evil."
Lucifer is also the snake, they are not separate.

some say the snake is Lucifer, others do not. I really don't care ether way. I am also well aware that Lucifer was the brightest angle. He was after all known as the light bringer and the morning star.

I think even among your peers they might disagree that Lucifer is not evil incarnate. If Lucifer was not the first evil then what was? if you subscribe to the idea that their is a evil as powerful as god working against him, that would describe a very different god of the bible.

regardless, god claims to have created evil. how nice of him...

 

[Chalnoth]

The symbol of snake / serpent as Lucifer is pretty obvious.

It's obvious now, but at the time it was written, it doesn't appear to have any relationship at all to Satan. And Lucifer, by the way, wasn't Satan either, but was a Babylonian king who was (according to Isaiah) destined to fall.

Lucifer and the snake only became Satan later when Christianity came about.

 

[Baggins]

God didn't create evil. Evil is a lack of good, like darkness is a lack of light; both can be experienced, but neither is a force per se.

In that case god must be a liar becuase he says he did in the Bible.

I am confused now.