by logansrun 151 Replies latest watchtower bible
seven 006,
It does not matter to me what definetion you come up with or where you even get it because I am my own mind in my own place. The scriptures talk about people like you and logansrun just to name a few so really I don't give a rats arse what you have to say as it is all just a bunch of garble anyways.
KGB,
It does not matter to me what definetion you come up with or where you even get it because I am my own mind in my own place. The scriptures talk about people like you and logansrun just to name a few so really I don't give a rats arse what you have to say as it is all just a bunch of garble anyways.
Well, at least you have such an open mind.
Bradley -- of the "I'm talked about in the Bible!!" class.
Cheers to you Bradley! Your comments are very well received here. More should look into the origins of Christianity. they just might find out that it really has very little to do with the teachings of Jesus. The Bible as we know it has so many stories taken from ancient Egypt and elswhere in the ancient world. Many writtings deleted or rewritten for political, patriarchal (sp) dominance. It goes on and on as more information is unearthed and analyzed.
Blessings!
KGB:
I don't give a rats arse what you have to say
So then why continue to "participate" in the conversation?
An old bro I've known for 40 years, real down to earth guy, did concrete work till his body broke. He told me something back when I was 18; I still think of it often. He said "Some people's minds are like concrete...thoroughly mixed up and firmly set."
Craig
Dang, Bradley! You can get deep when you wanna, huh?
I like a good argument but you got me boxed into a corner on this one. I can't agree more. You had me when I saw the title and thought of folks in my own ancestry that were frozen in a virtual state of helplessness by their "wait on da Lawd" mentality.
Excellent post, dude.
KGB,
I didn't come up with the definitions, Merriam Webster did. But you are free to change any definition in the dictionary you wish. It must be a fun place there in your own mind in your own place. The echo must be deafening.
Sorry you think what I say is garble. I'll try to use words not found in the English language or dictionary next time. I can be such an ass.
I didn't know the scriptures specifically mention me or Logansrun before. Aint we special.
Chill out, this is just a discussion board and doesn't reflect real life.
Dave
006.....Saying you have a stored brain wave that says you believe is no guarantee of anything. If there is a god then I think he would care more about who you are or were than what you say you believed or didn't believe. There are too many levels of each religion to try and subscribe to for one to say "I'm safer than someone who does not believe." That has never been proven no matter what either side says.It's a psychological game we all play with ourselves so we can sleep a little better at night. Each group seems to need others who claim the same label we have so that we can feel validated in our thoughts and actions as a result of that belief. This in reality will only help us in that feeling of safety and make us snuggle up to that pillow a little better at night.
That is excellent 006!
Quite so, but this analogy gives a false view of the ransom sacrifice notion. In it, God is doing the drowning of the victim. But if God stops drowning the victim, there is no need for a substitution. Moreover, such a simplistic analogy ignores the fact that for some thousands of years, God has supposedly been punishing all mankind for something they had nothing to do with.
Alan, its all down to how people interpret events, in your veiw God is drowning the victim, in the Christian worldveiw, the person has rejected God and has chosen to go to sea without a lifejacket. Who in the right mind would worship a God that is drowning someone and yet blaming them for not being able to swim? I agree with you, anyone who believes such has a screw loose.
To say that God is punishing mankind for something they had nothing to do with is based on the Adam & Eve story right? But the Bible says that each man will stand accountable for his own actions, no where does it say that we will stand accountable for what Adam & Eve did way back then, that is just a false premise and anything built upon it will ultimately be a misunderstanding. I certainly wouldnt have any interest in a God who held me responsible for what someone else did thousands of years ago.
Christ substitution was a voluntary surrender not a forced punishment, he willingly became flesh to appear to men and to restore mankind back into a relationship with the Father ( John 14:6). He was not forced to do it or punished into doing it, again the premise is wrong. God did use other means of communicating with mankind, but now his communication is through Christ (Hebrews 1:1).
If anything, in the Christian world view, God does not require that "a bad action by someone must be balanced by punishment to someone" Infact, by pointing to the cross a Christian would say that God is prepared to follow a "bad action" with forgiveness, even to the point of laying down his life. Even on the cross Jesus said "Father forgive them" meaning the ones who crucified him. He didnt say "Father kill em or punish em"
Well thats from the Christian worldview, whether I believe it all or not is another matter.
Brummie
The Renaissance, the Enlightenment, Reformation, modern Science, modern Democracy, etc. all came out of those nations who professed Christian belief. Evidently, the "helpless victim mentality" of Christianity did not prevent these movements from florishing. Rather, Christianity seems to be the medium which produced them.
Alan F,
I get your point, but this is the problem with trying to use any analogy to explain God or the actions of God.
Think of another analogy: Suppose you have two boys, Billy and Johnny. You tell them, "Don't touch those matches over there or I'll spank you." Billy plays with the matches and you're about to spank him, when Johnny says, "Don't spank him, Dad! Spank me instead!" You spank Johnny instead. Questions: Have you accomplished anything good by spanking someone other than the 'perpetrator'? Has justice been served? Is the purpose of justice simply to have someone -- anyone -- pay a penalty for a bad action?
In this case it would be a simple rule "don't play with matches" and the rule is made by an imperfect man. The man could easily ignore his own rule and let his children off without punishment. His credibility may be damaged, but he could live with that.
We have no way of knowing what catastrophe would happen in the universe if God would break His own law. Suppose God needed to change the rules keeping planets, stars, comets in their proper orbits?
I know this is not a very good answer, but I also know that you can analyze the problem of God allowing His perfect laws to be broken without consequences.
God gave the first couple just one law, we do not know why, exactly, but we can assume it was to see if they would be trustworthy before giving them eternal life. They failed that simple test, the one tree was not necessary for their food, they already had everything else in that paradise to use for food. They believed a liar, and wanted to be like God themselves.
If, at that point, God would have just excused them, what would have been the result to the entire universe? We can only guess. As it turned out, according to the bible, many of the angels rebelled against God and followed the liar. Had God not lived up to His word in carrying out His sentence on that first couple, He too would have been a liar.
The sentence was not pronounced against Adam's children and descendants. God was not punishing children, grandchildren, etc. Imperfection was now in the human genes and passed on to all following generations, not because God had failed, or, because He was hateful, but because our first parents brought imperfection into the entire human race.
God, because of His great love, then set into motion a way to remove the sentence of death brought on the human race by that first couple. I think that is an extremely loving act for God to do. He was under no obligation to make such a way for us, He could have just prevented the first couple from having children, then when they died, He could have started all over again, but, none of us would have had life.
Who made mankind to be inherently sinful, namely, inherently incapable of fully obeying God? God himself did! Therefore, God's punishing mankind in various ways for being what God made mankind to be is stupid, wouldn't you agree?
I cannot agree with you, God made mankind perfect, with freedom of choice. They were fully capable of obeying God, they chose not to.
I do not see it as God punishing mankind for how He made us. We, since that first couple, have no choice, we are born sinners, that is the reason for God's working out the way to save us from a penalty we had nothing to do with, without breaking His own laws.
I am a believer in the trinity, so I believe that, as the bible says, Jesus, as one of three persons of The God, created everything. That means Jesus created us, so, our Creator actually took on human form and gave His own life to pay the cost of our sinning, because we were born into sin and had no choice.
Later.
Borgfree
Hey BorgFree:
I apologize for jumping into this thread again, but your comments provoked a reply.
I understand the depth involved in contemplating whether or not universal/physical/spatial laws might have been altered due to the events in the supposed garden of eden.
But, ask yourself for a moment, does it really seem logial for an all powerful being to "lock" all universal laws together in a binding fashion so that any change alters the operation of everything?
Why hinge the forces of gravity upon the outcome of whether or not humanoids obey simple nutritional instructions? It seems almost ridiculous.
If my sound card is not operational, my laptop continues functioning. I troubleshoot the problem and make repairs. If my laptop would crash, then there is obviously a FLAW in design.
So, your assertion lends to the possibility that the supreme being is like a product from Microsoft.
I cannot accept that because it is not logical. It does not compute.
