Disobedience has consequences.

[oi_antz]

God appears to lack either ability, willingness, or both.

Yes, that is true.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

It is good to be skeptical sometimes, but not as much as is possible. Do you think it is good to be so skeptical to resist what is obviously good and right?

When someone claims to have all the answers, and doesn't allow for any questions, I think we are right to be skeptical.

 

[oi_antz]

God appears to lack either ability, willingness, or both.

Hey, I am just wondering why you did not answer that question I asked you. I am sure you will explain your reason for that. Seems to happen a lot, in my experience. In fact, it makes a resounding impression when people such as Colter do answer. I am just wondering, is it a difficult question, do you regret making the comment and wish to not admit it, are you just here to say what you want to say and eff everyone else, or being deliberately abusive to me? I am asking because I don't understand it. I don't do that to anyone.

 

[oi_antz]

When someone claims to have all the answers, and doesn't allow for any questions, I think we are right to be skeptical.

I have in mind right now, do you think I am right to be skeptical about taking a firm position for or against the factuality of Genesis?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Hey, I am just wondering why you did not answer that question I asked you. I am sure you will explain your reason for that. Seems to happen a lot, in my experience. In fact, it makes a resounding impression when people such as Colter do answer. I am just wondering, is it a difficult question, do you regret making the comment and wish to not admit it, are you just here to say what you want to say and eff everyone else, or being deliberately abusive to me? I am asking because I don't understand it. I don't do that to anyone.

This thread has advanced several pages since last I viewed it, so I'm not even sure of what question you are referring to exactly. Could you repeat it?

 

[oi_antz]

Incitement to violence.

So, that is a chink in the armour. Basically, you admit that perfect freedom of speech can be problematic. You have given just one example of why it might be. But I bet there is much more. Do you remember the conversation last week where Freodin and I began to investigate what sin is? We barely got started. But I mentioned that inflexible application of rules is wrong, whereas the principle that the rule was formed to reflect is the right way to judge. That is, letter of the law vs intent. I think you maybe are reflecting some resentment toward an imperfect application of the restriction of free speech, whereas you seem to be willing to agree that sometimes restricting free speech might be best. So I am wondering now, what has caused this resentment? Do you know of some action God has taken to restrict freedom of speech that is not right? If so, can you please describe that?

What, a perfect government? Do you mean to ask why do I think God's plan opposes free speech and freedom of thought?

I suppose so. But first I want to know in what way you think it does.

That would be the same thing as a representative democracy.

It isn't. Democracy is by definition government of the people, whereas I know that an elected government doesn't represent all people, only those who it wishes to represent, for whatever reasons that might be. So you say that most of the Western world has democratic government, but I say that they have democratically elected oligarchy, and I have watched, and I continue to watch, how political parties prepare for a campaign of public confidence every time elections come around, then as soon as the election is over, they go ahead and do what they do to serve the interests not of the people, but of the ones that they are interested in serving. I give for an example, secret negotiations for the TPPA. If our world was managed by democratic governments, people would be informed and included in those negotiations. But because we have an oligarchy, those negotiations are happening privately and then will be applied as law over the people.

Then again, you are not my target audience.

But I am just as much impacted by your propagation of false truth in the name of my Lord. I will naturally want to make sure you are corrected and encouraged to propagate the truth.

I have little problem with Christian Universalists, less with Annihilationists. I find the doctrine of universal torment whether expressed in Islam or Christianity to be abhorrent.

I do too. It does not add up, and it has deterred people from finding their comfort and rest in Him. You should not contribute to it, because it makes you complicit in that deception.

 

[oi_antz]

This thread has advanced several pages since last I viewed it, so I'm not even sure of what question you are referring to exactly. Could you repeat it?

Ah, a mistake. That is understandable. It was this one:

God also has free will. He could make a choice to eliminate it, but he does not.

Can you please describe what you have in mind?

Thanks!

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Ah, a mistake. That is understandable. It was this one:

Thanks!

My point there was that God, being omnipotent and omniscient, could intervene to prevent or eliminate evil.

 

[Davian]

To document that God hates religion, note the following passages of Scripture:

"...every abominable act which the Lord hates they have done for their gods, for they even burn their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods." (Deuteronomy 12:31)

"I have had enough of burnt offerings...Bring your worthless offerings no longer...I hate your new moon festivals and your appointed feasts; they have become a burden to Me... So when you spread out your hands in prayer, I will hide My eyes from you... I will not listen..." (Isaiah 1:10-15)

"I hate, I reject your festivals; nor do I delight in your solemn assemblies...take away from Me the noise of your songs; I will not even listen to the sound of your harps." (Amos 5:21-24)

These passages bear out the fact that God hates religion, and all of its procedures and programs; rituals and regulations.

Religion is inevitably the result of man taking that which is of God and forming it, formulating it, in such a way that men end up "playing God." Men can form idols out of wood or stone in an attempt to represent God, or they can formulate ideological idols (belief-systems, doctrinal definitions, theological theses). The men who thus form and formulate become the "chief priests" of the new religion because they are regarded as knowing the most about what God is like, and well they should for they formed "it."

There are three features which seem to be basic to all forms of man-made religion. Religion involves absolutism, authoritarianism and activism. Now there is nothing wrong with absolutes, authority or activity. God is absolute, authoritative and active. But when any man or group of men attempts to establish themselves as the arbiters or regulators of God's absoluteness, authority or activity, they then begin to "play god," and religion is the result as they impose their perspective of absolute, authority and activity on others.

Mat 15:6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
Mat 15:7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,
Mat 15:8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
Mat 15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Christianity is a bad thing then. Can I quote you on that?

 

[LostMarbels]

Christianity is a bad thing then. Can I quote you on that?

Wow... you have to be doing this on purpose. There is no way possible someone is this belligerent out of ignorance.

It has come to the point it is not worth speaking to you. I concede nothing. Bye Bye.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Wow... you have to be doing this on purpose. There is no way possible someone is this belligerent out of ignorance.

It has come to the point it is not worth speaking to you. I concede nothing. Bye Bye.

I don't see anything wrong with his question. If you're uncomfortable admitting something that you've implied about your god, it might signify an underlying issue with your beliefs.

 

[LostMarbels]

I don't see anything wrong with his question. If you're uncomfortable admitting something that you've implied about your god, it might signify an underlying issue with your beliefs.

Religion is inevitably the result of man taking that which is of God and forming it, formulating it, in such a way that men end up "playing God." Men can form idols out of wood or stone in an attempt to represent God, or they can formulate ideological idols (belief-systems, doctrinal definitions, theological theses). The men who thus form and formulate become the "chief priests" of the new religion because they are regarded as knowing the most about what God is like, and well they should for they formed "it."

There are three features which seem to be basic to all forms of man-made religion. Religion involves absolutism, authoritarianism and activism. Now there is nothing wrong with absolutes, authority or activity. God is absolute, authoritative and active. But when any man or group of men attempts to establish themselves as the arbiters or regulators of God's absoluteness, authority or activity, they then begin to "play god," and religion is the result as they impose their perspective of absolute, authority and activity on others.


If you would just read before posting.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

If you would just read before posting.

I did read.

You said your god hates religion.
Christianity is a religion.
Therefore, your god hates Christianity.

It's simple logic.

 

[oi_antz]

My point there was that God, being omnipotent and omniscient, could intervene to prevent or eliminate evil.

My point was I cannot imagine how He would do that and still achieve the same result. I asked you whether you had an idea in mind. Are you able to imagine how this would be possible?

 

[oi_antz]

I don't see anything wrong with his question. If you're uncomfortable admitting something that you've implied about your god, it might signify an underlying issue with your beliefs.

Thing that is wrong is that Davian has asked whether he can change LostMarbel's words to something that LostMarbel's has not said, and then asked whether he can offer this as a quote of what LostMarbel's has said. But he also says this in a mocking fashion, knowing full well that LostMarbels will object to it and that what Davian has paraphrased does not represent what LostMarbels would want to say.

So Davian is not really asking a question, but taking a contentious jab at LostMarbels because he likes to make fun of, and have fun making fun of, religious people.

Does this help you to see what is wrong with the question?

 

[LostMarbels]

I did read.

You said your god hates religion.
Christianity is a religion.
Therefore, your god hates Christianity.

It's simple logic.

It's simple alright...... Don't you ever feel bad that you actually cant come up with a good argument? It's gotta suck to have to rely on sarcasm, and twisting facts instead of actually having facts that can make a case.

Maybe you should come back at me and call me a meanie butt head, or tell me my God is false..... That will show me! Flick boogers or whatever it is that you do. It sure makes me look stupid.

 

[LostMarbels]

Thing that is wrong is that Davian has asked whether he can change LostMarbel's words to something that LostMarbel's has not said, and then asked whether he can offer this as a quote of what LostMarbel's has said. But he also says this in a mocking fashion, knowing full well that LostMarbels will object to it and that what Davian has paraphrased does not represent what LostMarbels would want to say.

So Davian is not really asking a question, but taking a contentious jab at LostMarbels because he likes to make fun of, and have fun making fun of, religious people.

Does this help you to see what is wrong with the question?

Thanks Budd. Normal cat fight between us. It is to be expected.

 

[Eudaimonist]

You said your god hates religion.
Christianity is a religion.
Therefore, your god hates Christianity.

It's simple logic.

Yes, and it's airtight logic. It is valid, if not sound.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[oi_antz]

Thanks Budd. Normal cat fight between us. It is to be expected.

People are passionate about their position, sometimes is easy to not assess the underlying cause of the problem.

 

[oi_antz]

Yes, and it's airtight logic. It is valid, if not sound.


eudaimonia,

Mark

I think the meaning of the word "religion" as lost marbels is using it is different than the meaning as you are using it. I get what he means, and I would be comfortable to say the same thing. But since I know what you mean too, I would probably be more careful to not say exactly the wy LostMarbels has said it. Out of interest Mark, do you know what LostMarbels is saying, and do you think that this is a misunderstanding of words, and that LostMarbels is making a fair point with airtight logic?