Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
(Guffaw). Total deflection once again. You refuse to directly respond to even the most simple, straightforward questions, because they easily refute your position.Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Then why not paint me one specific example - an example where it is appropriate to try to be as evil as possible?Your "rule of conscience" renders the terms good and evil meaningless, since apparently everyone defines them for themselves and there is no objective standard.
If your idea of "good" is sending millions of innocent people to the gas chamber, then that's an instance where it is appropriate to be as "evil" as possible.Then why not paint me one specific example - an example where it is appropriate to try to be as evil as possible?
Then you don't understand the quote, because it refutes your "rule of conscience" by showing that good and evil are not subjective.(Guffaw). Total deflection once again. You refuse to directly respond to even the most simple, straightforward questions, because they easily refute your position.
So let me get this straight.If your idea of "good" is sending millions of innocent people to the gas chamber, then that's an instance where it is appropriate to be as "evil" as possible.
See post 2044.Then you don't understand the quote, because it refutes your "rule of conscience" by showing that good and evil are not subjective.
I repeat "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!" Your belief that what you are doing is "good" does not make it good, it remains evil. Your "rule of conscience" destroys any possibility for morality because it renders the idea solipsistic, since the only thing that matters is what you believe whether it truly is evil or good. It makes a mockery of morality.So let me get this straight.
Suppose I am convinced that the holocaust is good, and abstaining is evil. For example I might be under the delusion that I will save all mankind (say 100 billion people) from death by pandemic, simply by exterminating the Jews. But I decide to be as evil as possible, so I abstain. I say to myself, "I don't care about 100 billion people dying by pandemic, let them all suffer. In fact I will enjoy it."
That would be pretty evil. Are you saying that was the right decision? That God should reward me for trying to be evil?
Deflection again. You deflect every signficant question posed to you.I repeat "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!" Your belief that what you are doing is "good" does not make it good, it remains evil. Your "rule of conscience" destroys any possibility for morality because it renders the idea solipsistic, since the only thing that matters is what you believe whether it truly is evil or good. It makes a mockery of morality.
If choice A is not truly good, but is in fact evil, God will reward neither. But then again, the idea that God is out handing out gold stars for good behavior is in itself a false proposition.Deflection again. You deflect every signficant question posed to you.
Let's try this again. Shall God reward a man for choice A? Or choice B?
...(A) He tries to do what is good/right to the best of his knowledge/ability.
....(B) He tries to what is evil to the best to the best of his knowledge/ability.
You'll deflect on this one too, right?
What Bible are you reading?But then again, the idea that God is out handing out gold stars for good behavior is in itself a false proposition.
What Bible are you reading? In your view, then, a man can be 100% faithful, all his life, in trying his best to behave righteously, and God won't reward him, because he lacked sufficient IQ to figure out God's will correctly.If choice A is not truly good, but is in fact evil, God will reward neither.
I haven't given up quite yet. Which should a man aim for:If choice A is not truly good, but is in fact evil, God will reward neither. But then again, the idea that God is out handing out gold stars for good behavior is in itself a false proposition.
One in which God selects the weak things to shame the strong.What Bible are you reading?
"100% faithful" If he's not following God's will, what's he being faithful to?What Bible are you reading? In your view, then, a man can be 100% faithful, all his life, in trying his best to behave righteously, and God won't reward him, because he lacked sufficient IQ to figure out God's will correctly.
You might not want to preach that message from the pulpit. You might get stoned!
See 2052.One in which God selects the weak things to shame the strong.
"100% faithful" If he's not following God's will, what's he being faithful to?
There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, But the end thereof are the ways of death.
Already been addressed, your questions fail to take into account that good and evil are not subjectively determined. You're essentially advocating following one's heart, which the Bible says:See 2052.
(Guffaw). This is yet another deflection, of the simplest, most straightforward questions.Already been addressed, your questions fail to take into account that good and evil are not subjectively determined. You're essentially advocating following one's heart, which the Bible says:
every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was altogether evil all the time.
God is going to judge us on objective truth rather than subjective certainty? Really?Already been addressed, your questions fail to take into account that good and evil are not subjectively determined. You're essentially advocating following one's heart, which the Bible says:
every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was altogether evil all the time.
What is "show exegesis"? Be specific in you ask..I thought you had been told before this, that Jeremiah 32:35, in context, is pretty obviously saying that it never entered his mind to command that they should do it. Are you going to show exegesis to prove that wrong, or just plow on ahead and ignore this?
Deflection. You shouldn't deflect on concepts relevant to a debate. To say, "God agrees with me, not you" is sheer assertion.You are more like my wife than I realized! Haha, yes she was a concrete thinker. She always had to have a resolution, a finished concept, NOW. Your definitions are good enough for you, no doubt. But since you're finite, I think I'll go with what God thinks, no matter how long it takes for me to know it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?