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.
If we knew all the conditions, then yes, we'd know. But that's not possible. We're not omniscient.But reality is deterministic... correct?
So in every instance what's considered to be moral is simply the result of antecedent conditions... correct?
I'm a determinist, so it is my belief that he was born for the destiny he fulfilled and it couldn't have ever technically gone any other way.Then the question is did Judas become son of perdition during his life or was he born that way? This is actually linked to the questions of objective morality. If he was born that way, he was created for hell. If he became a son of perdition, then it was his choice. I think he chose to do evil, but I’m not sure. He could have been born without a soul, and his destruction/perdition was complete. I’m not SDA, but there is a slight possibility that some people have no soul. Other than the Antichrist, nobody else gets the title.
Nothing new here, just word salad to deflect.The ends would be my wife being subject to me. Or not, depending on the decision. My intention is to ascertain which is the correct position. And the circumstances would be the relationship with my wife.
To be clear, I am not talking about reincarnation within this creation/reality, or being re-born as an animal, or an insect, or whatever, ok. Anyway, I'm not talking about any of that for those who don't get to go to Heaven after this, ok.I'm a determinist, so it is my belief that he was born for the destiny he fulfilled and it couldn't have ever technically gone any other way.
What I think Hell is, is just having more of this only for eternity, in both previous and what will be next fallen creations after this, that will be both before and after this, for an eternity, etc. But I don't think any of them is aware of this each time however, or they would be aware of it now, etc. But those are my beliefs about that anyway, etc.
And some are harvested for Heaven each time, which is the only real reason for fallen creations even existing. They have to go through and be acquainted with some suffering first before they can be harvested for Heaven most generally, etc. And the ones not being harvested for Heaven generally play a part in that most generally, etc, but don't get to go to Heaven after this most generally, etc.
God Bless.
That is what I think of in relation to the living spirit of God within animals, because I think the spirit is the life force, but the soul contains the eternal essence of a person, which animals probably don't have. I didn't think you were talking about Eastern Mysticism, but it might take a while for me to wrap my head around what you mean exactly.To be clear, I am not talking about reincarnation within this creation/reality, or being re-born as an animal, or an insect, or whatever, ok. Anyway, I'm not talking about any of that for those who don't get to go to Heaven after this, ok.
But I am talking about earths/creations that were both before this, and will be after this, etc, or that might even be in other places right now currently maybe, etc. But with some people, their program/essence does not immediately continue after the judgment is over with, or when some do immediately get to go to Heaven/continue on after this, etc, but their program/essence is stored in and with God until it needs to be re-created/resurrected/brought back up to fallen life again in another creation very similar to this one either before, or after this, or in another place after this "again", etc. And I say "again", because this has been going on/happening with them for a very, very long time now, and will continue to happen with them for a very, very long time yet, but they never ever were/are ever meant for Heaven, etc, but only some out of every creation are ever meant for Heaven each time it/they happen either before, or after, or in another place elsewhere maybe after this, etc.
Anyway, I'm not talking about the eastern mysticism theory of reincarnation, ok, and I just want to be clear on that.
I believe there are sometimes very, very long time periods between the ones not getting to go to Heaven's prior experience(s) and next experience(s) and that they are not aware of any of it each time, or they would be aware of it now, etc, but I've kind of already said that, etc.
So they experience an eternal life of eternal torment (compared to Heaven) and their destinies never could/can be ever changed ever, because they all always were/have been according to God's predeterminism/predestiny and/or omniscience, etc, which all always goes according to determinism or the way He has determined it here, as it's how He knows everything here, etc.
God Bless.
Do you expect to crank out moral decisions everyone agrees with without a process of discussion?How could any of this answer all the other questions I asked?
After some thought, I think I know what you mean. I wrote that the life spirit of animals might return to God to be recycled, but animals probably don’t have an immortal soul. This is similar to what you wrote about people. I think your “reincarnation” theory in relation to people doesn’t hold up under investigation. It is a clever thought, but I can’t think of any source for the theory. Is it just your idea, or does it come from another source?To be clear, I am not talking about reincarnation within this creation/reality, or being re-born as an animal, or an insect, or whatever, ok. Anyway, I'm not talking about any of that for those who don't get to go to Heaven after this, ok.
But I am talking about earths/creations that were both before this, and will be after this, etc, or that might even be in other places right now currently maybe, etc. But with some people, their program/essence does not immediately continue after the judgment is over with, or when some do immediately get to go to Heaven/continue on after this, etc, but their program/essence is stored in and with God until it needs to be re-created/resurrected/brought back up to fallen life again in another creation very similar to this one either before, or after this, or in another place after this "again", etc. And I say "again", because this has been going on/happening with them for a very, very long time now, and will continue to happen with them for a very, very long time yet, but they never ever were/are ever meant for Heaven, etc, but only some out of every creation are ever meant for Heaven each time it/they happen either before, or after, or in another place elsewhere maybe after this, etc.
Anyway, I'm not talking about the eastern mysticism theory of reincarnation, ok, and I just want to be clear on that.
I believe there are sometimes very, very long time periods between the ones not getting to go to Heaven's prior experience(s) and next experience(s) and that they are not aware of any of it each time, or they would be aware of it now, etc, but I've kind of already said that, etc.
So they experience an eternal life of eternal torment (compared to Heaven) and their destinies never could/can be ever changed ever, because they all always were/have been according to God's predeterminism/predestiny and/or omniscience, etc, which all always goes according to determinism or the way He has determined it here, as it's how He knows everything here, etc.
God Bless.
Not sure i understand all you are saying, but will do my best to answer as well as i can.In the video below Peter Singer equates morality/ethics with mathematics, which is a concept that I'd never considered before. Most people probably agree that mathematics is objective. It's true independent of our opinions about it. And I can see how it could be argued that morality is exactly the same. In math the understanding that 1+1=2 doesn't instantaneously lead to an understanding of Pi, because although the latter is equally true, coming to understand that it's true is a complicated process. Perhaps the same is true with morality. As with mathematics, morality may be objectively true, but understanding why it's true may be just as complicated as understanding why Pi is true. You don't instantly go from understanding that math exists, to understanding trigonometry, and you don't instantly go from understanding that morality exists, to understanding that slavery is immoral.
Thus there may be an objective morality, but as with math we're still in the process of understanding it, and the fact that we may disagree about what's moral doesn't by necessity mean that morality is subjective. It just means that we don't have a sufficient understanding of morality so as to understand why things are moral, and so instead, morality without God looks subjective, when it really isn't.
And in my opinion, having some God attempting to dictate to me what is and isn't moral will never be as gratifying as actually understanding why things are immoral without a need for that God.
I think that all beings have a chief spirit that they are made in the image of, which also reflects their personality, and what/how they think/act, and the way that they behave, etc. And with human beings, this chief Spirit is of course God, but, like, in the Garden of Eden, I think each "animal" that Adam got to "name" (according to a language that was pure back then (before Babel) and perfectly wrapped up that beings whole personality, and the way they thought/acted/behaved, etc) But and/or anyway, I think these "animals" in the Garden of Eden that Adam got to define/name, etc, might have actually been angels, or was at least a physical manifestation of that spirit beings entire behavior/personality that Adam got to "name", etc. And that each kind or type of animal we have now, each has a chief common spirit to which they return to, or get rejoined back with when they pass away, or when they die, etc. Don't forget that there are many, many books in the Bible that use animal likenesses/beasts to represent/describe nations and people groups, etc, representative of, I believe, of the angels who became jealous of man (who was made in God's likeness/image, and not an animals, etc) and who rebelled against both God and man, and who took the authority over the earth/national groups away from man in the Garden, etc. Anyway, I don't think these other images/likeness of quote/unquote "animals/beasts" representative of nations are a coincidence, but very, very much accurately describe the fallen angels who represent them, or gave birth to them, or made them, etc, (these different nations/people groups/world powers that would come about over the ages), etc. And the angels who did not rebel, I believe are still the cheifs of certain types of animals, or animal likenesses, etc, and is what happens with animals when they die, etc. Just like what happens with man and God when man dies, etc, God being the cheif, primary head Spirit of man, and to whim man returns to/rejoins with/becomes back a part with when he dies, etc.After some thought, I think I know what you mean. I wrote that the life spirit of animals might return to God to be recycled, but animals probably don’t have an immortal soul. This is similar to what you wrote about people. I think your “reincarnation” theory in relation to people doesn’t hold up under investigation. It is a clever thought, but I can’t think of any source for the theory. Is it just your idea, or does it come from another source?
You take some the much more tribal, pagan religions for example, who believed that each animal had a spirit, or had a cheif god/spirit, etc. Well, in a way, there was/is some truth to that, etc. But it's just sometimes a little bit off though, or it's incomplete though, etc.I think that all beings have a chief spirit that they are made in the image of, which also reflects their personality, and what/how they think/act, and the way that they behave, etc. And with human beings, this chief Spirit is of course God, but, like, in the Garden of Eden, I think each "animal" that Adam got to "name" (according to a language that was pure back then (before Babel) and perfectly wrapped up that beings whole personality, and the way they thought/acted/behaved, etc) But and/or anyway, I think these "animals" in the Garden of Eden that Adam got to define/name, etc, might have actually been angels, or was at least a physical manifestation of that spirit beings entire behavior/personality that Adam got to "name", etc. And that each kind or type of animal we have now, each has a chief common spirit to which they return to, or get rejoined back with when they pass away, or when they die, etc. Don't forget that there are many, many books in the Bible that use animal likenesses/beasts to represent/describe nations and people groups, etc, representative of, I believe, of the angels who became jealous of man (who was made in God's likeness/image, and not an animals, etc) and who rebelled against both God and man, and who took the authority over the earth/national groups away from man in the Garden, etc. Anyway, I don't think these other images/likeness of quote/unquote "animals/beasts" representative of nations are a coincidence, but very, very much accurately describe the fallen angels who represent them, or gave birth to them, or made them, etc, (these different nations/people groups/world powers that would come about over the ages), etc. And the angels who did not rebel, I believe are still the cheifs of certain types of animals, or animal likenesses, etc, and is what happens with animals when they die, etc. Just like what happens with man and God when man dies, etc, God being the cheif, primary head Spirit of man, and to whim man returns to/rejoins with/becomes back a part with when he dies, etc.
As for the rest, I thought I made it clear that I wasn't talking about reincarnation, but it's "whatever" I guess...
And my "source" is God the Father, and the Trinity, etc, do with it what you like, etc. And before that, it was the Bible, who got me introduced to Them, etc. Again, do with it whatever you like. I also have as a source what has been learned so far in this modern era, or ever since 2000 years ago also, which They have encouraged me to use and take full advantage of as well, and it has played a part in all of this also, etc.
Again, do with it what you like.
God Bless.
You are somewhat close to Plato’s ideal forms. You did make it clear that you were not talking about reincarnation of Eastern thought. Separating modern Christian thought from Platonism is almost impossible, so I won’t try to show how you have mixed the two, particularly since many of Plato’s teachings are probably correct. The thing with animals and nations is probably only symbolic. Jesus is the Lion of Judah. The animals in the Book of Daniel are good examples.I think that all beings have a chief spirit that they are made in the image of, which also reflects their personality, and what/how they think/act, and the way that they behave, etc. And with human beings, this chief Spirit is of course God, but, like, in the Garden of Eden, I think each "animal" that Adam got to "name" (according to a language that was pure back then (before Babel) and perfectly wrapped up that beings whole personality, and the way they thought/acted/behaved, etc) But and/or anyway, I think these "animals" in the Garden of Eden that Adam got to define/name, etc, might have actually been angels, or was at least a physical manifestation of that spirit beings entire behavior/personality that Adam got to "name", etc. And that each kind or type of animal we have now, each has a chief common spirit to which they return to, or get rejoined back with when they pass away, or when they die, etc. Don't forget that there are many, many books in the Bible that use animal likenesses/beasts to represent/describe nations and people groups, etc, representative of, I believe, of the angels who became jealous of man (who was made in God's likeness/image, and not an animals, etc) and who rebelled against both God and man, and who took the authority over the earth/national groups away from man in the Garden, etc. Anyway, I don't think these other images/likeness of quote/unquote "animals/beasts" representative of nations are a coincidence, but very, very much accurately describe the fallen angels who represent them, or gave birth to them, or made them, etc, (these different nations/people groups/world powers that would come about over the ages), etc. And the angels who did not rebel, I believe are still the cheifs of certain types of animals, or animal likenesses, etc, and is what happens with animals when they die, etc. Just like what happens with man and God when man dies, etc, God being the cheif, primary head Spirit of man, and to whim man returns to/rejoins with/becomes back a part with when he dies, etc.
As for the rest, I thought I made it clear that I wasn't talking about reincarnation, but it's "whatever" I guess...
And my "source" is God the Father, and the Trinity, etc, do with it what you like, etc. And before that, it was the Bible, who got me introduced to Them, etc. Again, do with it whatever you like. I also have as a source what has been learned so far in this modern era, or ever since 2000 years ago also, which They have encouraged me to use and take full advantage of as well, and it has played a part in all of this also, etc.
Again, do with it what you like.
God Bless.
Man, like God, has the special unique ability of being able to fully encompass/emulate/behave like all of the personalities/behaviors of all creatures, etc, which even the angels didn't have, or weren't able to get, etc, which is why some of them became jealous of him (man) and didn't want to be made subject to him, etc.You are somewhat close to Plato’s ideal forms. You did make it clear that you were not talking about reincarnation of Eastern thought. Separating modern Christian thought from Platonism is almost impossible, so I won’t try to show how you have mixed the two, particularly since many of Plato’s teachings are probably correct. The thing with animals and nations is probably only symbolic. Jesus is the Lion of Judah. The animals in the Book of Daniel are good examples.
That is fully in line with more than one totally pagan practices and sinful concepts, contrary to all Scripture.these "animals" in the Garden of Eden that Adam got to define/name, etc, might have actually been angels, or was at least a physical manifestation of that spirit beings entire behavior/personality that Adam got to "name", etc.
I've been around animals all my life, and I deal with wild animals on a daily basis. I can project human attributes onto them, but I haven't a clue how they think.Man, like God, has the special unique ability of being able to fully encompass/emulate/behave like all of the personalities/behaviors of all creatures, etc, which even the angels didn't have, or weren't able to get, etc, which is why some of them became jealous of him (man) and didn't want to be made subject to him, etc.
The key word here is "like" meaning only one or a few attributes. Jesus is brave and fierce like a lion and gentle like a lamb.This is how Jesus could be both like a lion at times, and also like a lamb, or other creatures at other times, etc. This is talking about the different sides to him of what he could be like as a man, etc. Angels were much more specific, etc.
God Bless.
I'm a determinist,
If we knew all the conditions, then yes, we'd know. But that's not possible. We're not omniscient.
Well, the "animals" in the Garden were not wild, and didn't yet have the fear of man, or any of the other fears that they have now after or as a result of the fall of man, so their personalities or behavior(s), or whatever, was not yet like that yet, etc, and that is also the way it is with non-fallen angels, etc. But the angels who did become fallen, or who did fall though, are probably much more like the wild animals that we now know that are out in the wild now though maybe, etc.I've been around animals all my life, and I deal with wild animals on a daily basis. I can project human attributes onto them, but I haven't a clue how they think.
Man (besides God) is the only creature who can be like any personality, etc. Even very, very much extremely contradictory ones like being able to be as vicious or violent as a lion, but also yet at the same time, as quiet and gentle as a lamb, etc. Man (besides God) is the only creature who gets to be able to do this, and it's something the angels didn't get.The key word here is "like" meaning only one or a few attributes. Jesus is brave and fierce like a lion and gentle like a lamb.
This is a very interesting theory, but I obviously don't understand how it can be like you seem to do. God bless.Well, the "animals" in the Garden were not wild, and didn't yet have the fear of man, or any of the other fears that they have now after or as a result of the fall of man, so their personalities or behavior(s), or whatever, was not yet like that yet, etc, and that is also the way it is with non-fallen angels, etc. But the angels who did become fallen, or who did fall though, are probably much more like the wild animals that we now know that are out in the wild now though maybe, etc.
Man (besides God) is the only creature who can be like any personality, etc. Even very, very much extremely contradictory ones like being able to be as vicious or violent as a lion, but also yet at the same time, as quiet and gentle as a lamb, etc. Man (besides God) is the only creature who gets to be able to do this, and it's something the angels didn't get.
If you could learn every single creature on this planets ways, then you would know all of the angels, and would know each of them specifically by name, if you had a pure language in which "the name was the thing, and the thing was it's name", etc. That language has been lost to the ages though, etc.
God Bless.
I'm just throwing some information out there, and kind of using you to help me do that (sorry) so you really don't have to fully get it all, or fully believe me either way, ok.This is a very interesting theory, but I obviously don't understand how it can be like you seem to do. God bless.
OkayI'm just throwing some information out there, and kind of using you to help me do that (sorry) so you really don't have to fully get it all, or fully believe me either way, ok.
But just kinda keep it in your back pocket, and see if any of the information I'm tossing out there, maybe ever comes up again for you again someday, ok.
God Bless.
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?