Serious Question To Christians

[Neon Genesis]

Ok, I just have one question here. Earlier in the thread Kratos said he would continue to ignore our posts if we kept hijacking the thread. All my responses since then have been entirely on-topic as far as I'm aware and yet why is he still continuing to ignore my posts but he's answering everybody else's questions? Am I just wasting my time here in this thread?

[Grandpa Harley]

I believe that if you think too individualistically instead of corporately you will miss how God's plan works.

This just reminded me of a quote from the film director Charlie Chaplin:

"

Life is a tragedy when seen in close-up, but a comedy in long-shot.

"

 

Actually you just touched on something quite important. How people in the past didn't view themselves as individualistically as we do today. That's part of the problem with the "personal god" idea. It took you as part of the bigger plan, as one of the nation under that god's name, and made him "Father". In which case it became individualistic. He was now Daddy, and not just a corporate deity anymore.

 

OK, I'm now stuck with 'From a Distance' and it's the Bette Midler version...

 

on the subject of the Reluctant Messenger... one thing about it, it's an 'epic' read, and pretty easy (I got through it in less than a week... and I was holding down a job at the time)

[Grandpa Harley]

Ok, I just have one question here. Earlier in the thread Kratos said he would continue to ignore our posts if we kept hijacking the thread. All my responses since then have been entirely on-topic as far as I'm aware and yet why is he still continuing to ignore my posts but he's answering everybody else's questions? Am I just wasting my time here in this thread?

 

 

 

Off topic... we're nasty men who've upset him (so is Deva) so we're ignored...

 

Either that or he's crap at multi-tasking...

[Kratos]

GH,

 

I have not answered you because I do feel that questioning the ancient languages of the Bible is off topic to the present thread. The OP asked Christians to share how they reconcile suffering in the world with a loving father. My various sources and life experiences from which I have developed how I believe are not the topic. Now, if I were trying to convice everyone that they should believe as I do then such questions would be on subject. But, as long as I am just sharing what I believe on the topic, it seems to be a red herring to derail the topic.

 

You certainly could start a thread on ancient languages if you like, but I have neither the expertise or the desire at this time to go down that rabbit trail.

 

Neon,

 

I told you long before this thread that I feel it is the better part of valor for both of us not to communicate directly and this is why I have not answered you. This has nothing to do with you being a "dirty man" as GH says, but that you seem very angry and argumentative toward God and Chrisitans. Others listen to what I say and add their perspective without attacking me personally with "Have you never read the Book of Genesis" or "It is obvious that you have never read the Old Testament".

 

I am frankly too old and too tired to wrestle in the mud with someone who likes the mud. I am not argumentative and walk away from such folk in person as well. Life is too short to have to dodge the jabs and the barbs while trying to communicate. I am sure it is as much me as you, but we just do not click with one another.

 

Peace,

 

John

[Neon Genesis]

GH,

 

I have not answered you because I do feel that questioning the ancient languages of the Bible is off topic to the present thread. The OP asked Christians to share how they reconcile suffering in the world with a loving father. My various sources and life experiences from which I have developed how I believe are not the topic. Now, if I were trying to convice everyone that they should believe as I do then such questions would be on subject. But, as long as I am just sharing what I believe on the topic, it seems to be a red herring to derail the topic.

 

You certainly could start a thread on ancient languages if you like, but I have neither the expertise or the desire at this time to go down that rabbit trail.

If you didn't want to respond to GH's post about your comment about the accuracy of English translations, then why did you bring up the subject of their accuracies in the first place? It's hypocritical of you to bring up an off-topic subject in this thread and then accuse other people of derailing the thread when you were the one who started the off-topic subject in the first place.

 

Neon,

 

I told you long before this thread that I feel it is the better part of valor for both of us not to communicate directly and this is why I have not answered you. This has nothing to do with you being a "dirty man" as GH says, but that you seem very angry and argumentative toward God and Chrisitans.

And I told you before that I cannot be angry at something I don't believe in. And it's hypocritical when you accuse people of being angry at Christians when it's you that makes people angry at you. Wouldn't you be angry too if someone came up to you and told you that your child suffering was entirely justified and acceptable? Apparently not.

 

Others listen to what I say and add their perspective without attacking me personally with "Have you never read the Book of Genesis" or "It is obvious that you have never read the Old Testament".

How is that angry for me to ask you those questions about your biblical knowledge? I am merely making observations based on the evidence you are providing us with. If you have in fact actually read the bible, then present us with evidence to prove that you have. Until then, we can only make the observations you haven't read it since you keep on ignoring verses in the bible where God clearly states he causes disasters and suffering.

[The-Captain]

Off topic... we're nasty men who've upset him (so is Deva) so we're ignored...

 

Either that or he's crap at multi-tasking...

 

Slightly ignored as well.

 

I realize he's only one person and he's the only one to debate his position but I'm willing to let him take his time to reply.

 

If I have a point, counter it. If I don't have one tell me. I don't want to whine or anything, but if I take the time to throw my 2 cents in I like to know that my time wasn't completely wasted...

[Grandpa Harley]

Off topic - the Freudian slip is informative inofitself - I said we're 'nasty' and John says that Neon is 'dirty'... hmmm

 

The raising of a subject, then declaring it 'off topic' when pursued is also a standard 'John' tactic... and Kratos, you've already stated elsewhere the Aramaic doesn't cover the meaning, now you're saying English is a mistranslation, while here you're again dismissing the ancient languages while dismissing the modern language too... Is there a Jazz interpretive dance version of the Bible I've missed, or are you just doing you new age nonsense again?

 

I fail to see that you actually qualify as a Chrisitan any more... and what exactly are you sharing here? A lot of stuff that makes you feel warm and fuzzy about dying kids...

 

Since we've already been told what is on topic by a Moderator I would appreciate being told if Kratos is making the rules, the language issue is off topic, or if he is now just abusing the protection of the Colosseum?...

 

Over to Antlerman, since this is going no where, bloody fast, and I'm going back to the 'disenfranchised' view, despite the assurances other wise... I would cordially suggest this is brokered quickly... I'm growing short on patience with this.

[Antlerman]

Since we've already been told what is on topic by a Moderator I would appreciate being told if Kratos is making the rules, the language issue is off topic, or if he is now just abusing the protection of the Colosseum?...

 

Over to Antlerman, since this is going no where, bloody fast, and I'm going back to the 'disenfranchised' view, despite the assurances other wise... I would cordially suggest this is brokered quickly... I'm growing short on patience with this.

Very well. I would say it deserves recognition for the reason that accuracy is counted as truth in the interpretation of scripture by Kratos, as I'm hearing it. Unless Kratos were to say anyone can read the Bible as they wish and ultimate truth is purely subjective, at which point Aramaic, Greek, or Latin makes no difference. I don't think it's off topic to address it, but if it overwhelms the topic as a whole discussion itself - at that time - we could decide if it should be a separate discussion. Some dialog on it would be pertinent.

[Kratos]

AM and GH,

 

I am neither a Bible literalist nor an innerancy of scripture guy so I just do not want to be drawn into trying to defend what are not my beliefs. As I have shared before, I believe that the Holy Spirit speaks to us through the mind of the spirit to reveal truth from the Bible and from everyday life. Being a Bible literalist without the quickening of the Spirit is just another form of dead letter that kills.

 

It isnot possible for one person to defend every accusation or problems that others have with Christianity so when someone makes a statement that does not move me to respond, I just let it go for others to tackle. It is a fool who plays a sport or on a field that he is neither skilled at or even cares who wins.

 

John

[Antlerman]

AM and GH,

 

I am neither a Bible literalist nor an innerancy of scripture guy so I just do not want to be drawn into trying to defend what are not my beliefs. As I have shared before, I believe that the Holy Spirit speaks to us through the mind of the spirit to reveal truth from the Bible and from everyday life. Being a Bible literalist without the quickening of the Spirit is just another form of dead letter that kills.

 

It isnot possible for one person to defend every accusation or problems that others have with Christianity so when someone makes a statement that does not move me to respond, I just let it go for others to tackle. It is a fool who plays a sport or on a field that he is neither skilled at or even cares who wins.

 

John

John,

 

Speaking as moderator in addressing Grampas objection to avoiding response to his reply about language, I had to look back at the original dialog:

 

But, as you know,

I do not believe that this is what the Bible teaches in the original languages and has been mistranslated into English

. I, also, know that this frustrates you about me because you feel that I just make it up as I go along.

I assure you that I do not

.

 

However, you did state that Aramaic wasn't the right language either... and that is the only tongue a Jewish first century carpenter would be comfortable in... This is an inconsistency, since much of what you're stating could only be stated in Romance languages (Greek, Latin, French Spanish, English, et seq) Not pre-Classical Hebrew nor Aramaic... Thus, we are heading back to making it up as you're going along...

 

That is a point you clearly raised and Grandpa responded to. You are stating your views are based on accurate interpretations of language. Do you wish to retract what you claim about original languages, or revise it to say something else? Based on what I read, it seems appropriate to expect a reply.

[Kratos]

Off topic... we're nasty men who've upset him (so is Deva) so we're ignored...

 

Either that or he's crap at multi-tasking...

 

Slightly ignored as well.

 

I realize he's only one person and he's the only one to debate his position but I'm willing to let him take his time to reply.

 

If I have a point, counter it. If I don't have one tell me. I don't want to whine or anything, but if I take the time to throw my 2 cents in I like to know that my time wasn't completely wasted...

 

Doc,

 

I apoligize if you felt slighted. I had to go back to find where I had missed responding to you.

 

How exactly does complete obedience to God's will provide an end or deterrent to suffering? We've been over this a million times, as a blueprint for an ideal world the Bible's "morality" fails. Quite the opposite, it creates and prolongs suffering. Is that going to change in these coming "ages" you see coming, or are you saying its more about learning to say "good is bad", "submission is elevation" and other bits of doublespeak?

 

As I understand it, as we come into obedience to God's will we naturally are entering the Kingdom where suffering does not exist. A Kingdom is not here or there like those who are waiting for a rapture to take them to where they can float on clouds all day playing harps. The Kingdom us within us to the extent that we submit to the dominion of the King we manifest the Kingdom.

 

As in the story of the Centurian that I shared earlier, this man understood the nature of authority that we only have authority to the extent that we submit to the one over us in authority. A seargent can tell a private to go get a jeep and drive it somewhere as long as he is not stealing it by doing something that the major did not tell him to do. As soon as the seargent goes off the reservation and acts independently of the one over him, he looses all authority over the ones under him. This is what Adam did and passed down to us. He acted independently and lost all Kingdom Authority. Jesus came to reverse this curse by doing the opposite and teaching us to do likewise.

 

This Centurian knew that Jesus had authority over demons and sickness to remove suffering because He only did what the Father told Him to do.

 

Learning obedience by suffering in a world without God's Kingdom should move us to press into the Kingdom so we will have the power to remove suffering supernaturally as Jesus did.

 

John

[Grandpa Harley]

Again, the Centrurion passage depends on which version you read. The earliest versions don't cite demons, just a healing... but the whole passage appears to be a late(ish) interpolation to give the impression that Jesus was recognised by the Romans (which, pre-mortem he wasn't, and his death passed unnoticed by Roman recordists, even the Sainted Josephus' father didn't mention the earthquakes and walking dead)

 

I assume you must be addressing illustrative myth, rather than a cosmology... Is this the case?

[The-Captain]

I apoligize if you felt slighted. I had to go back to find where I had missed responding to you.

 

No problem, thank you for replying.

 

As I understand it, as we come into obedience to God's will we naturally are entering the Kingdom where suffering does not exist.

 

But that's just my point, God's rules (OT law and Paulanity) don't create this kind of state. Sure some of the things Jesus said were nice, and the OT had some practical law, but these are simple things picked up on and better developed by others. Taken as a whole the results of "obedience to God's will" are not so rosy.

 

Two thousand years of church history can not easily be brushed aside as being the work of "false" Christians, w/e the motive the reasoning behind so many atrocities is rooted in the dogma of scripture. Not to mention the present day strife, division and personal suffering it brings.

 

So if it doesn't deliver in this life, why should we think it will in the next one or the next? Its pinning a lot of hope on something with no basis in reality.

[Guest end3]

MesaGman,

I did not do justice with my response the other day, so I would like to take time and submit a few thoughts. Thanks for the post. Please let me know if I am not understanding the nature of the question.

 

Let's just assume that God is real and he has all the power in the world to manipulate the universe as he is the creator and that we ARE his children. Also that we can become Gods, or we have his position, who knows maybe he decides that we athiests complain too much about him, and "Bruce Allmighty's" us with his powers.....

 

I watched Bruce Almighty, so you are saying, make us God for a time.

 

As a HUMAN father, I wouldn't dream of striking down my son or daughter with disease! I wouldn't gouge out their eyes blinding them. As a God I wouldn't let babies be born with spinal bifidida, or down syndrom, because if I were a human endowed with these God powers, I would cure all ailments and curses to Earth. Without having people believe who I am. I wouldn't care.

 

I think I would do the same, but I don't know if we would appreciate blessed without an understanding of cursed.

 

So, why would a HEAVENLY FATHER, decide to strike a kid with Spinal Bifidifa, or blindness, or Chron's disease, or Down Syndrom, or the dreaded Schizophrenia. or with God's powers, why doesn't he uncurse the world, with a magical wave of his hand, regardeless if people believe him or not?

 

I think hardship brings unity of Spirit to some, and also, so some will see these people working/caring, as a representation of God. I believe He will wave his hand so to speak, and do this when the full number of those that fill his criteria are brought to a "time" of his choosing. From a practical standpoint, I, as a father, tell my children the truth as well as I can understand, and desire that they believe in me to do that. I also warn them of the consequences, via my limited experience. I would assume God's knowledge of the consequences for not believing Him is greater than our understanding. There are also times when I withhold the truth from my children to protect them until they are mature enough to understand. Seems like truth can be a loving thing or a thing that could hurt us based on our level of understanding.

 

If me a lowly Human, a sinner destined for hell as you Christians put it, can know the difference between compassion, and crultey. Why can't a God, who controls all, is all, and will be all for ever as the Alpha and Omega?

 

I can't quite understand this last bit, but I am thinking you are saying, if you can tell a difference between compassion and cruelty, why can't God?

 

I have faith that He does....

 

 

[Ouroboros]

If me a lowly Human, a sinner destined for hell as you Christians put it, can know the difference between compassion, and crultey. Why can't a God, who controls all, is all, and will be all for ever as the Alpha and Omega?

 

I can't quite understand this last bit, but I am thinking you are saying, if you can tell a difference between compassion and cruelty, why can't God?

 

I have faith that He does....

But does your faith (or hope) that God does, change anything? You know what humans are capable of, both the bad with the good. But do you seriously see anything to support that God is good? Does he ever create a hurricane that heals people, instead of creating a universe where hurricanes kills people?

[Guest end3]

I think my answer to what you are saying Hans is: We are limited by our understanding and maturity as we are now, and we express that to the best of our abilities. But if God is omniscient, I have faith that He knows without limitation, what I need to know for my protection, and what I don't need to know yet because I am not omniscient and don't need to know until I am ready. I am saying our understanding of what is good or bad is limited by several factors.....experience, maturity, revelation, and on and on.....

 

so no, I may not be able to perceive a "change", or answer, because 1)I have a limited, real physical perception, and 2) His protection of me by limiting my omniscient knowledge.

 

The hurrricane analogy....sure, I think it "heals" many people through the efforts to "rebuild", a unity in spirit, and is in harmony with what we perceive as suffering, but I don't want to mix the two by saying that the the "healing" is a real physical healing as is the real physical damage of the hurricane.

 

hope that makes some sense, as I don't often

[Neon Genesis]

I think I would do the same, but I don't know if we would appreciate blessed without an understanding of cursed.

Can God appreciate blessings then since God doesn't have an understanding of what it means to be cursed since God is invincible and can never be hurt? If God can't appreciate blessings, why should we worship a God that expects us to appreciate blessings through suffering but doesn't suffer yet claims to know what blessings are? Why doesn't God practice what he preaches? Also, please read this interesting article: http://atheism.about.com/od/argumentsagain...rfectvirtue.htm

 

I think my answer to what you are saying Hans is: We are limited by our understanding and maturity as we are now, and we express that to the best of our abilities. But if God is omniscient, I have faith that He knows without limitation, what I need to know for my protection, and what I don't need to know yet because I am not omniscient and don't need to know until I am ready. I am saying our understanding of what is good or bad is limited by several factors.....experience, maturity, revelation, and on and on.....

If we can't understand what God's ways are because he's too mysterious, then why were you just trying to explain God's ways to us? Either we can understand that God's permitting of suffering is beneficial to us or we can't know what the purpose of it is because he's too mysterious. You can't have your cake and eat it, too.

[Kratos]

Again, the Centrurion passage depends on which version you read. The earliest versions don't cite demons, just a healing... but the whole passage appears to be a late(ish) interpolation to give the impression that Jesus was recognised by the Romans (which, pre-mortem he wasn't, and his death passed unnoticed by Roman recordists, even the Sainted Josephus' father didn't mention the earthquakes and walking dead)

 

I assume you must be addressing illustrative myth, rather than a cosmology... Is this the case?

 

GH,

 

To me, Bible study is more art than science. I go with what God teaches me heart to heart. You can study the life out of anything, but that does not work for me. If it works for others that is fine too. If a passage speaks to me, I retain it and if not, I let it pass until later. I really do not care what means were used to write or assemble the Bible. I just know that it helps me through life and this is enough for me.

 

John

[Kratos]

I apoligize if you felt slighted. I had to go back to find where I had missed responding to you.

 

No problem, thank you for replying.

 

As I understand it, as we come into obedience to God's will we naturally are entering the Kingdom where suffering does not exist.

 

But that's just my point, God's rules (OT law and Paulanity) don't create this kind of state. Sure some of the things Jesus said were nice, and the OT had some practical law, but these are simple things picked up on and better developed by others. Taken as a whole the results of "obedience to God's will" are not so rosy.

 

Two thousand years of church history can not easily be brushed aside as being the work of "false" Christians, w/e the motive the reasoning behind so many atrocities is rooted in the dogma of scripture. Not to mention the present day strife, division and personal suffering it brings.

 

So if it doesn't deliver in this life, why should we think it will in the next one or the next? Its pinning a lot of hope on something with no basis in reality.

 

All I can say is that it ain't over until it is over. Romans 8 says that the whole creation waits for the manifestation of the sons of God who will set at liberty the creation. Each generation has moved this time closer to occuring and we will all share in the benefit of what we have corporately purchased through our corporate suffering in time.

 

John

[Guest end3]

Neon,

All the understanding I have is that God is omniscient and came to earth to identify with us. I would assume, being the creator, that he well knows both blessing and suffering.

 

I don't remember saying God was too mysterious to understand. I know what he has given me in Love, but don't know what he has withheld from me in Love. Who said it was a this or that, an either, or, an absolute? Even the bible says we only see in part.....

[MesaGman]

But what if those Sons of God, are athiests, and do this not to realise some magical kingdom on earth, but a logical civilized more modern society, of science, and enlightenment, where science and knowledge and differences are valued. And science isn't used to invent weapons to help a country kill another in the name of God, but science is used to elevate man to a logical world of dignified order.

 

Blasting influenza would be a BIG step in the right direction, because I'm coming down with the feverish pukes right now. Like what kind of Sane Father would create INFLUENZA? That's a nasty disease, puking, fevers, being mutated. Like we could use science to cure pathogenic illnesses that mutate us into zombies (being sick makes one feel like a zombie), instead of praying to some Mary statue, or a pancake that looks like Mary.

[Grandpa Harley]

Again, the Centrurion passage depends on which version you read. The earliest versions don't cite demons, just a healing... but the whole passage appears to be a late(ish) interpolation to give the impression that Jesus was recognised by the Romans (which, pre-mortem he wasn't, and his death passed unnoticed by Roman recordists, even the Sainted Josephus' father didn't mention the earthquakes and walking dead)

 

I assume you must be addressing illustrative myth, rather than a cosmology... Is this the case?

 

GH,

 

To me, Bible study is more art than science. I go with what God teaches me heart to heart. You can study the life out of anything, but that does not work for me. If it works for others that is fine too. If a passage speaks to me, I retain it and if not, I let it pass until later. I really do not care what means were used to write or assemble the Bible. I just know that it helps me through life and this is enough for me.

 

John

 

 

and thus we're back to cherry picking and making it up as you go along from a position of deliberate and will full ignorance. I see... Somehow, I neither surprised nor impressed... and you certainly don't want or require dialogue with that view. So, why do you actually want ot 'share' (which means 'sell') this world view to us? And please, spare us all the 'personal' relationship Bull... it's just a way of avoiding having to discuss stuff that is both evil and insane in your world view...

 

Thanks for finally fully discrediting your self as anything more than an arrogant charlatan.

[Grandpa Harley]

I think my answer to what you are saying Hans is: We are limited by our understanding and maturity as we are now, and we express that to the best of our abilities. But if God is omniscient, I have faith that He knows without limitation, what I need to know for my protection, and what I don't need to know yet because I am not omniscient and don't need to know until I am ready. I am saying our understanding of what is good or bad is limited by several factors.....experience, maturity, revelation, and on and on.....

 

so no, I may not be able to perceive a "change", or answer, because 1)I have a limited, real physical perception, and 2) His protection of me by limiting my omniscient knowledge.

 

The hurrricane analogy....sure, I think it "heals" many people through the efforts to "rebuild", a unity in spirit, and is in harmony with what we perceive as suffering, but I don't want to mix the two by saying that the the "healing" is a real physical healing as is the real physical damage of the hurricane.

 

hope that makes some sense, as I don't often

 

 

So, ignorance is 'good' while your god wipes us out wholesale? Hmmm... sounds like a monster to me.

[Kratos]

I do not see how an atheist could be one of these manifested sons because Jesus described a son as one who only does what the Father shows him to do. A son does not act independently or in his own direction, but faithfully represents what the Father would do in the same situation.

 

Back to the example of a business owner wanting to bring his two sons into the business. The older one may never like how his father has run the business and cannot wait for dad to pass on so he can make what he thinks the business should really be. The younger has so eaten and drank of the father's vision and constitution that left alone he would do exactly what the father would do in the same situation.

 

Jesus addressed this toward the end of John 6 which has been misunderstood in my opinion to come up with the whole doctrine of the eucharist and transubstantiation. He said that we must eat his flesh and drink His blood and then He says that if not what if the Son of Man were to ascend into Heaven. In other words, if we do not want to be changed to think and believe and feel like Him, once He ascended, we would all just do what seems right in each of our own eyes.

 

This was a prophetic statement because this is exactly what happened when He ascended. We have thousands of sects and denominations to prove it.

 

A son of God is not one by birth, but one by training and maturity to be able to say that if you have seen me, you have seen the Father. How can you be such a son if you do not believe that He is and have not learned to hear His voice? Jesus spent the first 30 years of His life learning sonship so that finally God testified of Him and said that this was His beloved Son in whom He was well pleased. To me (and this is only me), life is about being conformed to the image of the Son as He was conformed to the image of the Father so we can overcome as He overcame and was counted worthy to rule over the works of His Father's hands.

 

John

[Grandpa Harley]

I apoligize if you felt slighted. I had to go back to find where I had missed responding to you.

 

No problem, thank you for replying.

 

As I understand it, as we come into obedience to God's will we naturally are entering the Kingdom where suffering does not exist.

 

But that's just my point, God's rules (OT law and Paulanity) don't create this kind of state. Sure some of the things Jesus said were nice, and the OT had some practical law, but these are simple things picked up on and better developed by others. Taken as a whole the results of "obedience to God's will" are not so rosy.

 

Two thousand years of church history can not easily be brushed aside as being the work of "false" Christians, w/e the motive the reasoning behind so many atrocities is rooted in the dogma of scripture. Not to mention the present day strife, division and personal suffering it brings.

 

So if it doesn't deliver in this life, why should we think it will in the next one or the next? Its pinning a lot of hope on something with no basis in reality.

 

All I can say is that it ain't over until it is over. Romans 8 says that the whole creation waits for the manifestation of the sons of God who will set at liberty the creation. Each generation has moved this time closer to occuring and we will all share in the benefit of what we have corporately purchased through our corporate suffering in time.

 

 

 

John

 

As a point of order... Stop using the Bible as a method of justifying stuff... Effectively, if we do it we're told we either don't understand it like you do, or it's in error... Romans 8 justifies nothing. It's just something you like... well, whoop-de-doo... you've built an 'unassailable' world view by the following methods

 

1) you disregard anything you don't like

2) You claim a 'personal' relationship that in a civilised world would have you confined an medicated if you claimed it was with Zeus

3) You claim 'special' knowledge

4) You cling desperately to a level of ignorance I could only apply to non-European Protestant Clergy... which, I seem to remember, you are.

 

 

I still maintain you're a liar when you say that you are here to understand 'our' view, since you're clearly not interested in it, simply espousing your own myth like it is somehow 'true'. The forbidden topic damns you enough, but you continue to actually dig deeper and deeper.

 

I have no idea what religion you actually follow, but I do know that the monstrous views you hold place you at the nasty end of the Christian spectrum, just with some heretical eisegesis that would get you removed from any Church I know, save Episcopalian, where I think the idea of a literal God is 'negotiable'...

 

I repeat some questions I've asked before - What do you want from Ex-Christians? Why do you persist in espousing a world view that on a site where it is universally abhorred? What do you hope to gain, other than being an irritant?