And well I used to steady these things quite deeply..I investigated all of the resurrection accounts..it was surprising how far away it was from factual..none of it held up..i never investigated gilgamesh, but ive heard of it...zorotorism for example.. thats easy, it is a blatant copy of judiasm, mixed in with a reading of the messiah prophecies. there are critical differences however. they say the spirit of God is bad and good and He is only good. They worship the creation rather than the one who created it. there is no atonement, and salvation is by works. it is just like any other pagan religion, but with an idea of good and evil gained from judiasm and the prophecies of the messiah. zorro is a crude copy of christ, not the other way around as it turns out. Remember Satan is the accuser ie the prosecuting attorney. He understands the law down to the letter, he understood a messiah was to come..he always knows his rights.. >> ^enoch:
>> ^shinyblurry:
Is there a point where you're actually going to contribute something to the conversation, or are you just going to stay in the peanut gallery and snipe at me?
No one is out. Just because different Christians believe different things doesn't make them unchristian. Misled, perhaps, but anyone who believes on Christ is saved. Personally, I am non-denominational.
How is the book of John ruled out? What on earth are you talking about? The passages referring to what people call the rapture could be interperted a few different ways..I accept them, I just read them differently.
Look, it's clear you don't know anything about scripture. Why don't you do some research before you toss around these ignorant statements.
>> ^enoch:
>> ^shinyblurry:
No, I don't believe in the rapture..I don't think it is biblical. I know a lot of Christians hope for that but I think it's a false doctrine. No, I don't believe in the May 21st 2011 date either..for two reasons. One is that scripture clearly states that no one knows the hour. That alone makes anyone setting a date automatically wrong. The other is that the person who made this prediction had made another prediction that the world would end in 1994. Obviously it didn't happen so that means that he is a false prophet. If a prophet makes a prediction and even one letter of it doesn't come true it means he is not a real prophet.
>> ^shuac:
While I certainly do not wish to add more stress to shiny by adding more questions to his docket...but ultimately, I cannot resist. And anyway, they're easy yes/no questions...
1) Do you believe in the rapture?
2) Do you believe that it will happen on May 21, 2011 as many theists predict?


ok.
so the pentacostals are out /scratches them off the list.
as is the book of john../more scratching.
any other books i should dismiss?


i am just following the conversation brother.
listening to your witness and taking notes.
so dont dismiss the books but allow for interpretation../check.
read more scripture../check
let me ask you a question.
since you feel im "sniping" from the peanut gallery.( i was being a snark..but snipe is nicer)
if you do not believe in the rapture and find it non-doctrinal,would you consider yourself to be a preterist?
do you consider yourself from ecclestiassitcal,calvinism or maybe even of a arminianism theosophical school of thought?
and if ecclestiassical..how have you resolved the issue of the nicean creed?
another i am curious as to how you may have resolved is zoroastrianism.
how have you been able to separate the seemingly identical stories from both the bible and this pre-christian religion?
i mean one could come to the conclusion that monotheism was actually born from this religion which was influential in judaism and christianity.
reading zarathustra's sermons one may find some close similarities to many of the earliest books of the bible.
or the story of gilgamesh and its seemingly identical recitation of noah,even though gilgamesh was centuries before noah.
how did you rationalize that particular conundrum?
one last question.
since you are christian,as am i,i am extremely curious how you were able to resolve the issue of the resurrection deities:
krishna,osiris,dionysus,mithra.
all were have purported to be the son of god.
to have began their ministry at an early age.
performed miracles.
persecuted and then executed.
dead for three days.
and on the third day were all resurrected.
what about the female resurrection deities?
ishtar and persephone?
they have similar stories too!
i am curious how you dealt with these particular theological dilemmas.

These are most excellent question(s)..I am happy to answer it..i will get back to you with all the facts, I will answer it in full but first I will just say that there is a massive amount of deception out there. Especially in these cases..a lot of half truths that people accept as whole ones. Not one of them bears any validity. The facts never hold up in these cases, and I mean 0 bears any true refutation of the facts. This world is fallen and mankinds new strategy is to try to forget about Him or write Him out..I will only say Forgive them Lord, they know not what they do. People believe they don't need God. They don't know they commit spiritual suicide. This fantasy world they dream up to replace Him is so ridiculous..It's been compared to disneyland. We are just drowning in existential bullshit. Primitive tribalism. Barbarianism. Extreme vanity and pride. No mercy, no forgiveness. In their coldness, people believe these lies because they have not much imagination of anything truly good and its always as good as who you really are. I find the truth is always accurate in situations like these. It is measured according to what it really is, and the well is poisoned by any lack of character, no matter how slight, because God is perfect. People aren't getting away with anything. God knows their hearts better than they do. If you're not good you won't know about it, you just couldn't imagine it really. And the bible says none of us are good. So we have to seek God. we are intolerant useless greedy selfish..there are just some of the synomyms i can think of..Peter Gabriels Big Time seems relevent..And some of them are Christians who are just sort of taking on the mantle for curtural reasons. Well the bible says these people have only borrowed the name and that is at a price. The facts always bear out, if people investigated they would figure that out. The truth always bears investigation by definition and the facts will always hold up. That is, that Jesus Christ is the living God and will heal you.

>> ^enoch:
>> ^shinyblurry:
Is there a point where you're actually going to contribute something to the conversation, or are you just going to stay in the peanut gallery and snipe at me?
No one is out. Just because different Christians believe different things doesn't make them unchristian. Misled, perhaps, but anyone who believes on Christ is saved. Personally, I am non-denominational.
How is the book of John ruled out? What on earth are you talking about? The passages referring to what people call the rapture could be interperted a few different ways..I accept them, I just read them differently.
Look, it's clear you don't know anything about scripture. Why don't you do some research before you toss around these ignorant statements.
>> ^enoch:
>> ^shinyblurry:
No, I don't believe in the rapture..I don't think it is biblical. I know a lot of Christians hope for that but I think it's a false doctrine. No, I don't believe in the May 21st 2011 date either..for two reasons. One is that scripture clearly states that no one knows the hour. That alone makes anyone setting a date automatically wrong. The other is that the person who made this prediction had made another prediction that the world would end in 1994. Obviously it didn't happen so that means that he is a false prophet. If a prophet makes a prediction and even one letter of it doesn't come true it means he is not a real prophet.
>> ^shuac:
While I certainly do not wish to add more stress to shiny by adding more questions to his docket...but ultimately, I cannot resist. And anyway, they're easy yes/no questions...
1) Do you believe in the rapture?
2) Do you believe that it will happen on May 21, 2011 as many theists predict?


ok.
so the pentacostals are out /scratches them off the list.
as is the book of john../more scratching.
any other books i should dismiss?


i am just following the conversation brother.
listening to your witness and taking notes.
so dont dismiss the books but allow for interpretation../check.
read more scripture../check
let me ask you a question.
since you feel im "sniping" from the peanut gallery.( i was being a snark..but snipe is nicer)
if you do not believe in the rapture and find it non-doctrinal,would you consider yourself to be a preterist?
do you consider yourself from ecclestiassitcal,calvinism or maybe even of a arminianism theosophical school of thought?
and if ecclestiassical..how have you resolved the issue of the nicean creed?
another i am curious as to how you may have resolved is zoroastrianism.
how have you been able to separate the seemingly identical stories from both the bible and this pre-christian religion?
i mean one could come to the conclusion that monotheism was actually born from this religion which was influential in judaism and christianity.
reading zarathustra's sermons one may find some close similarities to many of the earliest books of the bible.
or the story of gilgamesh and its seemingly identical recitation of noah,even though gilgamesh was centuries before noah.
how did you rationalize that particular conundrum?
one last question.
since you are christian,as am i,i am extremely curious how you were able to resolve the issue of the resurrection deities:
krishna,osiris,dionysus,mithra.
all were have purported to be the son of god.
to have began their ministry at an early age.
performed miracles.
persecuted and then executed.
dead for three days.
and on the third day were all resurrected.
what about the female resurrection deities?
ishtar and persephone?
they have similar stories too!
i am curious how you dealt with these particular theological dilemmas.

>> ^shinyblurry:

Is there a point where you're actually going to contribute something to the conversation, or are you just going to stay in the peanut gallery and snipe at me?
No one is out. Just because different Christians believe different things doesn't make them unchristian. Misled, perhaps, but anyone who believes on Christ is saved. Personally, I am non-denominational.
How is the book of John ruled out? What on earth are you talking about? The passages referring to what people call the rapture could be interperted a few different ways..I accept them, I just read them differently.
Look, it's clear you don't know anything about scripture. Why don't you do some research before you toss around these ignorant statements.
>> ^enoch:
>> ^shinyblurry:
No, I don't believe in the rapture..I don't think it is biblical. I know a lot of Christians hope for that but I think it's a false doctrine. No, I don't believe in the May 21st 2011 date either..for two reasons. One is that scripture clearly states that no one knows the hour. That alone makes anyone setting a date automatically wrong. The other is that the person who made this prediction had made another prediction that the world would end in 1994. Obviously it didn't happen so that means that he is a false prophet. If a prophet makes a prediction and even one letter of it doesn't come true it means he is not a real prophet.
>> ^shuac:
While I certainly do not wish to add more stress to shiny by adding more questions to his docket...but ultimately, I cannot resist. And anyway, they're easy yes/no questions...
1) Do you believe in the rapture?
2) Do you believe that it will happen on May 21, 2011 as many theists predict?


ok.
so the pentacostals are out /scratches them off the list.
as is the book of john../more scratching.
any other books i should dismiss?



i am just following the conversation brother.
listening to your witness and taking notes.
so dont dismiss the books but allow for interpretation../check.
read more scripture../check

let me ask you a question.
since you feel im "sniping" from the peanut gallery.( i was being a snark..but snipe is nicer)
if you do not believe in the rapture and find it non-doctrinal,would you consider yourself to be a preterist?
do you consider yourself from ecclestiassitcal,calvinism or maybe even of a arminianism theosophical school of thought?
and if ecclestiassical..how have you resolved the issue of the nicean creed?
another i am curious as to how you may have resolved is zoroastrianism.
how have you been able to separate the seemingly identical stories from both the bible and this pre-christian religion?
i mean one could come to the conclusion that monotheism was actually born from this religion which was influential in judaism and christianity.
reading zarathustra's sermons one may find some close similarities to many of the earliest books of the bible.
or the story of gilgamesh and its seemingly identical recitation of noah,even though gilgamesh was centuries before noah.
how did you rationalize that particular conundrum?
one last question.
since you are christian,as am i,i am extremely curious how you were able to resolve the issue of the resurrection deities:
krishna,osiris,dionysus,mithra.
all were have purported to be the son of god.
to have began their ministry at an early age.
performed miracles.
persecuted and then executed.
dead for three days.
and on the third day were all resurrected.

what about the female resurrection deities?
ishtar and persephone?
they have similar stories too!

i am curious how you dealt with these particular theological dilemmas.

>> ^shinyblurry:

Do you wear a cologne called attitude? You could bottle the sneer dripping from your words and sell it for a tidy sum. Though it doesn't surprise me that you're actually advocating for Satan in the story, it was a lie no matter how narrow, obtuse, and willfully ignorant your interpertation is. They did die, that makes it a lie. God told them the truth about it.
It was not their lack of knowledge that made them "inferior", it was their faith in God that made them superior. Yet, God gave them the choice didn't He? Your argument here is null and void. He enjoyed a perfect relationship with them but He gave them the choice of knowing anyway. He warned them if they did it they would die. They chose not to trust God and lusted after his power, and then they reaped the consequences, which was seperation from God. It's the same story going on on Earth, right now, in every heart that has turned away from God. What He did, and is still doing, is fair and just. He doesn't coerce your love, but he will let you reap the consequences of the evil that you do, and He even gives you fair warning.
What's absurd is your nasty and sarcastic attitude. It's just pure arrogance; have you ever read the bible? You're here railing against something you have no understanding of. You're condescending to me about my intellect when even a child has a more cohesive understanding here than you do. Btw, regarding the ridiculous "blasphemy challenge"
John 6;39
And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day.
As far as whether the Earth is old or young, I don't know. It isn't clear. I've seen models where the geology of the planet could be explained by a young Earth, and ones that dispute it. I don't really care, to tell you the truth. It makes no difference to me whether the Earth is young or old. Science hasn't proved it either way, and the bible isn't exactly clear on it, so there isn't a way for me to say definitively. To me the jury is out and it doesn't look like it will be back anytime soon. What is important to me is a relationship with Jesus Christ, not how old His creation is.
>> ^hpqp:
>> ^shinyblurry:
God let them know it was wrong to disobey Him by outlining the consequences if they did. They chose to believe the lie instead, and lusted after Gods power. Thus they sinned and became spiritually seperated from God. The perfect cannot be joined with the imperfect.
The whole point of our lives is to love God (and eachother) and live with Him forever in paradise. That's why He created Adam and Eve in the first place. Man sinned and fell, became seperated from God, and became mortal and lost their place with God.
Your argument is that it is immoral. Well how can you judge God? No sinner could and I include myself in that. How could an immoral being judge a moral one? It's only your excuse for not doing what He told us to do. God is Holy, but you have believed the lie that He isn't. You are choosing death over life, because that is all sin is. The soul that sins is the soul that dies, but Gods gift is eternal life.
In regard to the unforgivable sin, the reason it is unforgivable is because when you become a Christian you receive Gods Spirit. His Spirit is what transforms us, makes us a new creation. If you reject His Spirit, you cannot be transformed, so therefore you cannot be forgiven.
Everyone who has taken the so-called blasphemy challenge just to please their inner demons of being completely dead to Christ are mistaken. None of them have done anything unforgivable and can all still be saved.

I was going to suggest reading Byron's "Cain: A Mystery", which develops the immorality of original sin in a much more sophisticated and poetic fashion, but seeing that you did not even get the point of the nonstampcollector video I linked (if you even watched it), Byron would be way over your head.
You say: "God let them know it was wrong to disobey Him by outlining the consequences if they did."
Have you even read the Bible? God is the one who lies, saying "in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" (Gen.2:7); the serpent, OTOH, tells the truth (Gen. 3:4-7, italics mine):
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
7 And the eyes of them both were opened, [...]
It is the lack of knowledge that makes the fabled first humans inferior to (and dependant upon) their father-figure creator. Religion relies on ignorance, obedience and blind faith in authority, i.e. everything that demarcates a dependent infant from an independent adult.
You use a lot of religious terms as if they actually meant something. Please define these if you want your argumentation to be the least bit intelligible:
God; sin; moral (in relation to "God"), God's spirit.

Since you did not address the incest remark while continuing to speak of Adam and Eve as if they really existed, I'll assume that you really do think we all descend from only two humans, which is totally absurd. Do you also think the Earth is only 6000 years old? Perhaps the Sun revolves around it (Eccl.1:5)? And is it a flat disc (Is.40:22)?
(Btw, most of those who took the "blasphemy challenge" grew up Christian, so no, imaginary Sky-Daddy cannot forgive them)



Since you continuously miss the subtleties of my critiques while avoiding the actual questions that are being posed, I will spell it out as simply as I can. (Note that my intellectual condescension, which you are right in spotting, is based entirely on your unintelligent responses and childish emotional reactions, your disregard for logic, your circular reasoning and your incessant ad hominem attacks. But please, don't let my "nasty and sarcastic attitude" get in the way of your reasoned and logical argumentation... for which we are still waiting.)


1. On the literal reading of Scripture: My question as to whether you took the Adam/Eve/Eden myth as factual and historical truth is crucial, and since you continued to base your argumentation on the assumption that it is, I followed up with questions pertaining to other literal readings of the Bible, i.e. YEC, geocentrism and flat earth theory. In later comments you dance around the issue of the Earth's age, but refuse to address one of my first questions: is all humanity the actual descendants of the fabled Adam and Eve? If not, the whole theory of original sin crumbles. You might argue, as the begrudgingly-evolution-accepting catholic church does, that "original sin" is equivalent to "human nature", which completely voids the whole "created in His image" and "free will" things.

2. On hypocrisy and cherry-picking: I wish I could say how surprised I am at you being oblivious to your hypocrisy and self-contradiction, but it is all too common among religious apologists. You accuse me of "narrow, obtuse, and willfully ignorant" interpretation, of arrogance, ignorance and condescension (I fully own up to that last one), and in the very same lines are guilty of all of the above. What makes your interpretation correct, and mine - which is based directly on the actual text - incorrect? Oh yes, your dogma, which declares that there is only one correct reading of the Bible, i.e. the Christian one, no matter how contrary to the text it is. You assume that any one who contradicts your creed with the help of your holy book "has no understanding" of it... and I'm the arrogant one? I could be a theology major for all you know, and while I am not, I have read the Bible thoroughly enough to know it for what it is: a collection of myths, romanticised history, laws and poetry, written by men.

Concerning the "blasphemy challenge", if I understand your reasoning cherry-picking logic, there is no need to believe in God, the Bible or any Christian creed, since we're all going to heaven anyway, right? But then, in a later comment you proclaim that only some are chosen ("many are called..." I know). What happens to those who are not and, more importantly, how will you get out of that without contradicting yourself?

3. Please do not skirt the questions: note that the "answers" to my earliest questions, repeated here, were unintelligible due to your use of terms (see below) which need clarification.

>>"So the story of Adam and Eve is not just a myth, and we are all descendants of incestuous sex (twice, if the story of Noah is taken into account)?

So God values blind obedience higher than natural curiosity, and expects Adam and Eve to obey without knowing that disobeying is "bad" (since they don't yet have the knowledge of good/evil)?

So it is moral to punish an infinity of generations of humans for what their ancestors supposedly did? And then present the "gift" of forgiveness if you submit to the god who caused you to be "sinful" in the first place??"


>>"You use a lot of religious terms as if they actually meant something. Please define these if you want your argumentation to be the least bit intelligible:

God; sin; moral (in relation to "God"), God's spirit."

>> ^shinyblurry:

>> ^peggedbea:
i've never had a hard time wrapping my head around the idea of a "creator" i understand how one could exist, and the need to believe that one exists and even the desire/importance of pleasing it.
i could never understand the importance of jesus. i'm confused how any of my petty little human sins can cause me to be so abominably filthy in the eyes of my "father" that he needs to have a son and then torture and kill it to make my sins ok. noone has ever been able to offer a satisfactory explaination of jesus's role in the plan of salvation for me.

Well, it's not exactly an easy thing to wrap your mind around. Firstly, if you don't have the spirit it will seem as nonsense. The bible even says this:
1 Corinthians 2:14
The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.
So, there's that. I'll try to make it comprehensible..
In the beginning, man had a perfect relationship with God. Adam and Eve lived in paradise
with God, and He would come and dwell among them as well. God gave them one command, not to eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. He told them that if they ate of that fruit they would surely die. To this point, Adam and Eve were immortal and did not know death.
Shortly after, Adam and Eve were tempted to eat of the fruit. Satan told them that God was lying, and that He told them to stay away from it because it would make them like God, knowing good and evil. Until this point, Adam and Eve had completely trusted God to take care of their needs. Now, they desired to have His knowledge and make their own judgements about what is good and what is evil. This is what brought about the fall.
They found out quickly that Satan had lied, and that they would die. Their sin had brought death into the world, and it has been inherited by their descendents ever since. This is what is meant by "original sin" They were kicked out of the garden and forced to toil and labor, and their days were numbered from then on.
Now here is the reason Christ came. To break the curse of death, liberate man from his sins, and reconcile him back to God. People focus on the death, but that is only part of it. Since no man had been able to live up to the requirements of Gods law, they had all earned condemnation under the law, which means everyone is guilty and no one is going to Heaven.
Therefore, to make man right with Him, He sent His Son to Earth as a human being. Christ brought His divinity down to Earth, as a man, and lived a perfect life. His sacrifice on the cross was for the atonement of all sins, past present and future. He was only able to do this because He himself had never sinned. He took our place for the punishment we deserve. Meaning, anyone who believes in Christ will have His sins forgiven because Christ already paid the price. This is the purpose of His death, not that God needed to torture someone, but to give all of mankind access to God through Him, through the remission of their sins. His resurrection broke the power of death over man, and guaranteed eternal life for any man who believes in His name.
So, any man, no matter what he has done, what just punishment he has earned..where ever he might be..by faith in the life death and resurrection of Jesus, he has his sins forgiven, a promise of eternal life, and justification before Gods very throne as an adopted Son of God.
Jesus, who is divine, made us like Him. Salvation is a free gift we didn't earn. To make it into Heaven we must be transformed. Our sin nature must be removed and we must live in the Spirit of God. Anyone who refuses to be transformed by Gods spirit cannot enter Heaven, because the sin nature will not be allowed in. This is why Christ is the only name by which we can be saved. Hope this helps. God bless.


So the story of Adam and Eve is not just a myth, and we are all descendants of incestuous sex (twice, if the story of Noah is taken into account)?

So God values blind obedience higher than natural curiosity, and expects Adam and Eve to obey without knowing that disobeying is "bad" (since they don't yet have the knowledge of good/evil)?

So it is moral to punish an infinity of generations of humans for what their ancestors supposedly did? And then present the "gift" of forgiveness if you submit to the god who caused you to be "sinful" in the first place??

You should really watch this short video, which illustrates simply the nonsense and immorality of the whole "atonement" shtick.




Btw, not everything is forgiven by el Heyzeus.

@braindonut

"I get the argument of "people don't want to come to god, because their sins will be revealed." But this is a fallacious argument - an ad hominem attack. Just saying that I don't believe in something because I clearly have a bunch of faults that I'm trying to hide does not make it so."

Well, I am not going to press you here since I don't know what you've done in your life, but in my experience this is true. Most of the people I find running away from God are prideful and sinful, and they don't want to stop. They don't want their "freedom" to sin restricted in any way because they are only living for that gratification and they don't think there is anything else.

Remember, I believe in the literal truth of these statements..it only seems like an attack to you because you see all things are being equal here, and don't think God is real. I see it as a completely accurate description of the state of things, then and now.

"And by what do I measure my morality? I measure it through the impact on others, how much it affects the general well being of humanity. Obviously, it's my own morality which is constantly improving and questioning itself. However, saying that it's filthy rags in comparison to god does not make it so."

If God exists, and is Holy, then our righteousness would be a broken thing compared to His..since we're all sinners. In any case, I would ask..how would you measure the general well being of humanity? How do you know what is best for one human, let alone all of them?

"And yes, everyone has done "evil," if you want to call it that. Including god, if we accept that premise. I've read the bible, and I underlined every situation that was immorality due to god with a red pencil. There were too many underlines to count. But how does one consider something immoral? That's a big and excellent question. The wholesale slaughter of humanity, aka genocide - that qualifies as evil for me. And that's just the tip of the iceberg in regards to the evil that is attributed to the Christian god."

How do you judge an omnipotent being? What is your basis of comparison? How do you judge a holy God who has never done evil? Lets take the flood for example. You say wiping out humanity was evil. Yet this is what the bible says:

Genesis 6:5-8

The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And the Lord was sorry that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart. 7 So the Lord said, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the heavens, for I am sorry that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.

It says that man was entirely corrupted except for Noah. That he was the only man left capable of doing Gods will. Now, would it be more merciful to have let Noah perish in this environment and let man become wholly degenerate, living completely futile lives until they utterly destroyed themselves anyway? Or was it better for God to wipe the slate clean and give humanity another chance?

"And simply saying that gods thoughts are higher than my thoughts does not make it so, nor does it convince me even remotely. What I am looking for is for YOUR thoughts to be higher than mine, since you are currently the person I am engaging with. If gods thoughts are higher than mine, he certainly hasn't demonstrated it. And that saying "You can't talk your way out of something you behaved yourself into" applies here. (of course, I'm just talking stories...)

And I didn't say I would go to hell to make a point. I said that if the premise I laid out is accurate (which I assume it is since you didn't challenge it), it seems obvious to me that an ethical person who truly cares about their integrity wouldn't be able to side with god. At the very least, it would be an extreme conflict that would take enormous rationalization to sweep aside. But what I described doesn't seem like madness, to me. I think it seems like the only honorable and honest position."

I just made the point to illustrate that God is Holy, and it is impossible for someone who isn't holy to judge someone who is. The ultimate point I was making really was that its impossible for any human being to judge God.

I am an ethical person, and God is the reason for that. Someone who doesn't know God is only going to see God from the angle of His punishment, because it is hanging over their heads. God is love, and He doesn't want to punish anyone. But if He didn't punish sin, He wouldn't be just.

I think people have a lot of hypocripsy on this viewpoint here..for instance..atheists will support the death penalty and life in prison for serious crimes. To an atheist, this punishment is permanent because they believe death is the end of life..but they have no problem supporting a human doing that to another human. Yet God, who created us and has the power of life and death..they can't support His punishment. Would it be just for humans to let murders run free? If we did this place would quickly devolve into anarchy. So if that is just punishment why isn't Gods punishment just?

No one here would advocate we shouldn't lock up rapists murderers and pedophiles..so why you are outraged when God punishes our crimes? He is the only one who could actually be completely fair about it, knowing as He does every last detail.

"And the idea that god would setup a world where he knows people aren't going to do what he wants, so he has to punish them, but then he gets tired of that so he eventually creates a manifestation of himself that he then gets killed/sacrificed... and all of this is so that he can create a loophole for all of humanity to make it into heaven... I'm sorry, this doesn't seem like godly, virtuous behavior, it seems like bronze age mythology and reasoning."

I think it's clear that God has foreknowledge. Yet, I don't think it's all predestined. God gives us choices and we couldn't make a choice if we didn't have free will to make one. When we receive Christ it literally says that God doesn't remember our sins anymore. So, to me this suggests He can arrange things around His omnipresent knowledge. He could easily set things up to give us real freedom. I think I could even figure out a way to do that.

"In conclusion, I truthfully used to be a very devout Christian. I did believe, strongly. However, I never experienced anything that would indicate that god exists. I did ask for him to reveal himself and I still have a standing invitation which he is more than welcome to fulfill at any moment. However, I find nothing interesting or compelling about the concept that I have to truly believe in order for him to show himself to me. One, that clearly wasn't the case (and don't tell me that I clearly didn't believe enough...). Two, deeply held beliefs are shown to cause people to look for validation of their world view, no matter how small or insignificant, because it's those rationalizations and experiences that fuels their continued dependency on belief

I make no claims to knowing that a god doesn't exist, but I definitely have more than enough reasons not to believe in the god of the Bible. Such a leap is not something I can honestly do - and yes, that's a moral stance. It's the same reason I don't lie to people - I also can't lie to myself. I really appreciate how much time and effort you put into your response. Thank you very much."

Well, lets take the example of Mother Teresa. She didn't hear from God for a period of over 40 years. Yet, she kept the faith and did what God commanded her to do the entire time. Personally, I have special revelation that God is real. It's not an issue for me at all..to me God is as real as my reflection in a mirror.

Now lets take your case as an example. Perhaps God has tested your love. You know first of all that we know God through faith, a faith which you abandoned after not getting the evidence you desired, which is entirely contrary to what God told you to do. Now if you were God and you knew that someone would love you only for a time and then leave you, unless you provided something extra above and beyond the perfect love you were already giving them, along with the fact that they wouldn't honor any of the promises they made to you ultimately, maybe you wouldn't give them any signs either. Maybe you would let them go and hope they would be able to see the difference and come back to you. Just a thought.

I also appreciate this discussion and I think you for your civility and magnanomousness. God bless.

"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left. Two women will be grinding with a hand mill; one will be taken and the other left."

- Matthew 36-41

Not even the good book is as presumptuous as some people.

>> ^mkknyr:

>> ^shinyblurry:
What Dan Savage does isn't sex. It's consensual sodomy. Thats part of what evil does is redefine the meanings of things. The love that two gay men have for eachother is not beautiful, it is repulsive. God does not approve of their union, and they should never be married. What they love is sin, and sin is not beautiful. It is an abomination before the Lord..

did god create monkeys? did god create frogs? can these animals sin?
http://videosift.com/video/Monkey-Using-Frog-as-Sex-Toy


Oh don't be silly, Animals don't have souls.

I mean, it's not like god created them and asked noah to save two of every animal on a boat the size of texas so he could let them pass through the pearly gates. That would just be stupid.

Are they mentioning the rainbow as a veiled reference to Christians who believe god showed a rainbow as a promise of trust to Noah?

I'm sure there's some kind of unspoken thought that wicked unchristian - (not white) people are punished by floods.

This one's at 8 now but was just recently promoted..

http://videosift.com/video/Give-a-Little-Love-Noah-and-the-Whale-live-on-the-street

In reply to this comment by Krupo:
Hit me up with your vids at 8.

A rollover without music is a rollover not worth having!>> ^taranimator:

I read a funny comment on YouTube -- normally when you survive a rollover you don't get out and start jamming.
Until then I hadn't noticed it either.
>> ^calvados:
Completely failed to notice the car on its side until just now.

I read a funny comment on YouTube -- normally when you survive a rollover you don't get out and start jamming.
Until then I hadn't noticed it either.
>> ^calvados:

Completely failed to notice the car on its side until just now.

'tis posted.

Thanks! Hope GDGC doesn't mind.

http://videosift.com/video/Give-a-Little-Love-Noah-and-the-Whale-live-on-the-street

In reply to this comment by calvados:
Pish, I've already got rank. You take it.

Pish, I've already got rank. You take it.

In reply to this comment by taranimator:
You go for it! I'll vote for it -- send me the link

In reply to this comment by calvados:
Oi, do you want to sift the other version that you found, as well? I think it'll go all the way. It'll certainly get my vote!

In reply to this comment by taranimator:
Loved it! Gave it my vote!
In reply to this comment by calvados:
Likey? It's not even mine but it deserves to get 10:

http://videosift.com/video/Give-A-Little-Love-Noah-And-The-Whale

You go for it! I'll vote for it -- send me the link

In reply to this comment by calvados:
Oi, do you want to sift the other version that you found, as well? I think it'll go all the way. It'll certainly get my vote!

In reply to this comment by taranimator:
Loved it! Gave it my vote!
In reply to this comment by calvados:
Likey? It's not even mine but it deserves to get 10:

http://videosift.com/video/Give-A-Little-Love-Noah-And-The-Whale