Why Do You Remain A Christian?

[Guest Valk0010]

You can't be perfectly good and even indirectly create evil.

 

What do you mean by 'indirectly creating'? Either something is created or it is not created. What is 'indirectly created'?

 

 

God did not create evil. God created Freedom - which may seem like a very dangerous thing to you and me. But God is ultra confident. He is confident enough to create free agents which can even turn evil on their own.

 

 

Even when a major free agent like Lucifer turned evil and took over the earth, God remained perfectly good and judges Lucifer with perfect justice.

Get the god goggles off already. And quit limiting your god.

 

Sure, we were created with free will. So was satan.

 

Confidence is irrelevant.

 

Again the nature of your god means he couldn't create evil.

 

And yet he did.

 

Here is how. Here is a hypothetical example of how a suitation is indirectly created.

 

Lets say you own a gun store. And your really into pyschology. And one day someone comes in with all the proper papers and wants to by a AK47. You notice this guy show signs of what might be called schizophrenic behavior. Now your want money badly so you sell the gun to him. And then on the news you hear. About a person with Ak47 having the same sort of description you saw in the news. He blew up a bank with a bunk of people. Killed them all.

 

You being the person who sold him then gun and knew full well he displayed what might be called schizophrenia sold him the gun.

 

-----------------------------

 

Now think about the god of the bible. He goes one day. I think I might create a angel with more abilities and more freedom then any other. I know full well because evil can exist that he may well turn bad because of all of these new abilities but I will do it anyway. I hate with grime death evil, but now I am going to create things that can become evil. Then he creates Lucifer who becomes satan knowing full well how the situation would turn out.

 

Then he thinks ohh one day, I may create a universe, with beings way less powerful but the same kind of freedom and I will allow satan to reign down there. I will put them in a garden with things that if they eat will damn them to hell. But its not my responsiblity cause I am god and I am always right.

 

 

 

Notice the similarity. Just as the gun store owner helped to create a evil disaster. God helped to spread the ability of evil.

 

And god is supposedly maximally good and maximally intelligent.

 

There for it makes no logical sense so say that god can exist as far as I can see.

 

If he was maximally good and maximally intelligent he could not have helped to spread evil.

 

Another way to look at is saying. That pre the existence of satan or angels, evil in the universe or whatever you want to call it was say at 25%. After the creation of satan and earth, evil went to say 80% Who made it so there was more evil in the world? God after all he knew every little detail of what could happen and why things could happen, cause he created everything as he wanted it.

[Ouroboros]

First of all, your anger may be quite unwarranted.

Anger? He's a lying bastard. You say he didn't do anything wrong.

 

I, for one, am perfectly happy with my explanation that Jesus spoke everything in public and nothing in secret. What he explained to his disciples were essentially the same information as he said in public ( in parable form ). And if the general public were willing to ponder those parables hard enough and long enough, they may have figured out the same information the disciples got 'in secret'!

He said he spoke in secrets. I don't understand why your understanding of English is so poor?

 

Let me explain using my QM analogy. I am teaching conclusions of quantum mechanics to a general audience using simple illustrations ( like parables ). But when it comes to my grad students ( who had been in my research group for 3 years ), I can explain the ins and outs of mathematical foundation of QM. Obviously what I am teaching to grad student is much more powerful and it is material that was not made given to the general audience. But the conclusions my grad students can draw from their understanding would be exactly same as ones general public were taught about.

It's not the same as saying that you are intentionally talking in parables to hide the truth and then explain them to the "elite" group. That's not the same at all.

 

You're weird.

 

And here comes Ouroborous and ask me about quantum mechanics material I have been teaching. So I say, well, my teaching is all in public. Go ask them. All you need to know is out there in my public address. And the O turns really angry. 'I know you have been teaching secret material to your grad students. You lying asshole!'. My reply is, 'Come on man, it is the same material. But had I explained in terms of partial differential equations, you would not understand a damn thing. Have you been working in my research group for past 3 years?? The fact is you are on the level of general public. All you can understand is out there, man. I am not teaching anything new 'in secret'.'

He said he was intentionally talking in riddles and then he explained them to his inner group. That's not talking openly. By talking openly, you talk openly about the things people don't understand in the open. You don't talk in secret by talking in the open. And you don't talk in the open by talking in secret. I think your comprehension skills are a bit off.

 

Of course, I doubt this parable would lessen Ouroborous's anger.....

Anger? I think it's stupid!!! It's insanely stupid and idiotic. And I can't understand that someone who claims to work in science is so totally captured in stupidity. But that's your problem, not mine.

[Ouroboros]

O is not angry. And you are either dumb as a box of rocks or a dishonest prick.

Probably both. And some lying in there too.

[Guest Valk0010]

O is not angry. And you are either dumb as a box of rocks or a dishonest prick.

Probably both. And some lying in there too.

I vote for dumb as a box as rocks. If you have to explain the simple concept of creation causes responsibility to someone, you dealing with a dense person I think.

[centauri]

the thing about pentecost - EVERYONE there had to take the apostles' word that 'jesus' had really risen and that they had really seen him. No one else got to see a risen jesus but had to accept someone else's subjective experience. That's where we are right down to this day - when j talks about 'personal experiences' it comes down to subjective experience that can only be interpreted by the individual who had that experience, it has no possible relevance for anyone else. I need more than someone else's warm fuzzies.

 

 

Suppose apostles got together and agreed to claim Jesus has resurrected. Well, if you look at the situation around Jesus' death, you find Jesus Christ has been thoroughly rejected by Jews and died most humiliating and indeed 'most cursed' of all death. He was executed as an evil criminal. And his so called apostles fled and were hiding in deep fear for their safety. Their next plan may be to make a safe getaway to Galilee. They had no allies to speak of in Jerusalem.

 

Now suppose these apostles come out in public and proclaim that Jesus has risen from dead.

 

Why wouldn't they be seen as the biggest laughing stock and then immediately arrested by the authority? Why would anyone listen to these guys??

 

Why??

According to the Gospel of Matthew, many dead people were resurrected and strolled into Jerusalem when Jesus died and they were seen by the public.

Would you like to explain why people would laugh at the apostles when they had already been exposed to dead people having come back to life?

 

According to Luke, believers had no problem telling even strangers about Jesus being resurrected.

The recent adventures of Jesus being a miracle worker who was crucified were common knowledge in Jerusalem.

 

Luke 24:17-24

And he(Jesus disguised) said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?

And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?

And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:

And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.

But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done.

Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre;

And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive.

And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.

 

Yes, we can see that the Biblical account truly happened ! That is why they did not end up as the laughingstock of Jerusalem.

The problem is that there was never any public appearance of Jesus.

Jesus only appeared to cult members.

There was only hearsay evidence, supplied by cult members, to vouch for Jesus being resurrected.

At Pentecost, the believers babbling in tongues were thought by some to be drunk (Acts 2:13).

[bdp]

 

O is not angry. And you are either dumb as a box of rocks or a dishonest prick.

 

Don't underestimate him - he may well be both.

[mcdaddy]

If there was ever a bigger douche than Jay, I'd love to meet him. I just don't think that person exists.

 

Just like how there's no corroborating evidence anything in the NT actually happened. It's all a mythical tale with just a few historical pieces tosses in to give the illusion of historicity. Bu of course Jay the troll soaks the myth all up as though it were written by a modern day historian who checks sources, verifies information, interrogates witnesses, etc.

 

It's really sad to see someone take an obvious fiction and treat it as literal history.

[Guest Valk0010]

If there was ever a bigger douche than Jay, I'd love to meet him. I just don't think that person exists.

 

Just like how there's no corroborating evidence anything in the NT actually happened. It's all a mythical tale with just a few historical pieces tosses in to give the illusion of historicity. Bu of course Jay the troll soaks the myth all up as though it were written by a modern day historian who checks sources, verifies information, interrogates witnesses, etc.

 

It's really sad to see someone take an obvious fiction and treat it as literal history.

I would still like someone to try prove that he did what he said he did, without trying to rewrite how historical study is done or commit the arguement from ignorance fallacy.

[JayL]

He said he was intentionally talking in riddles and then he explained them to his inner group. That's not talking openly. By talking openly, you talk openly about the things people don't understand in the open. You don't talk in secret by talking in the open. And you don't talk in the open by talking in secret. I think your comprehension skills are a bit off.

 

Yes, you are right. I am having a trouble comprehending what you are saying here.

[JayL]

If there was ever a bigger douche than Jay, I'd love to meet him. I just don't think that person exists.

 

 

I don't know why. I had a big laugh when I read this.

[Ouroboros]

Yes, you are right. I am having a trouble comprehending what you are saying here.

Understandable.

[Guest Valk0010]

He said he was intentionally talking in riddles and then he explained them to his inner group. That's not talking openly. By talking openly, you talk openly about the things people don't understand in the open. You don't talk in secret by talking in the open. And you don't talk in the open by talking in secret. I think your comprehension skills are a bit off.

 

Yes, you are right. I am having a trouble comprehending what you are saying here.

Are you sure its not your god goggles? People even in real life say I have trouble with regular old english and I get what hans is saying. For something who likes quantum mechanics parables. What hans is saying shouldn't be past you.

[JayL]

O is not angry. And you are either dumb as a box of rocks or a dishonest prick.

Probably both. And some lying in there too.

I vote for dumb as a box as rocks. If you have to explain the simple concept of creation causes responsibility to someone, you dealing with a dense person I think.

 

 

Actually there may be some element of truth to this. I give plenty of credit to young whipper snapper like BOA.

[Ouroboros]

He said he was intentionally talking in riddles and then he explained them to his inner group. That's not talking openly. By talking openly, you talk openly about the things people don't understand in the open. You don't talk in secret by talking in the open. And you don't talk in the open by talking in secret. I think your comprehension skills are a bit off.

 

Yes, you are right. I am having a trouble comprehending what you are saying here.

Are you sure its not your god goggles? People even in real life say I have trouble with regular old english and I get what hans is saying. For something who likes quantum mechanics parables. What hans is saying shouldn't be past you.

And don't forget that I'm talking in riddles to hide the truth. I only reveal the truth to those who can hear.

[JayL]

He said he was intentionally talking in riddles and then he explained them to his inner group. That's not talking openly. By talking openly, you talk openly about the things people don't understand in the open. You don't talk in secret by talking in the open. And you don't talk in the open by talking in secret. I think your comprehension skills are a bit off.

 

Yes, you are right. I am having a trouble comprehending what you are saying here.

Are you sure its not your god goggles? People even in real life say I have trouble with regular old english and I get what hans is saying. For something who likes quantum mechanics parables. What hans is saying shouldn't be past you.

He said he was intentionally talking in riddles and then he explained them to his inner group. That's not talking openly. By talking openly, you talk openly about the things people don't understand in the open. You don't talk in secret by talking in the open. And you don't talk in the open by talking in secret. I think your comprehension skills are a bit off.

 

Yes, you are right. I am having a trouble comprehending what you are saying here.

Are you sure its not your god goggles? People even in real life say I have trouble with regular old english and I get what hans is saying. For something who likes quantum mechanics parables. What hans is saying shouldn't be past you.

 

 

"He said he was intentionally talking in riddles" Riddles? We went from parables to riddles?? I don't think they are quite the same! LOL

 

OK, so what Hans is saying is this: Jesus should have told his disciples exactly the same things, the same words he told to general public. If he explained anything more to his disciples, using different words, he cannot claim that all his teachings are out in the open.

 

 

And I am saying Jesus is not teaching anything different to his disciples. He is NOT taling riddles and he is not saying one thing to the crowd and another thing to his disciples. It is same proclamation about the Kingdom of God. The teachings of Jesus is out there in the open.

 

Now given that the disciples have made their commitment to share his ministry and have been with him for years, he had a lot more opportunities to answer their questions and to explain his teachings more fully. Yes, some of those explanations may be quite powerful - 'the secrets of the Kingdom'. But isn't the same information in the parables? If some in the general public really thought deeply about the parables, they may have reached those same 'secrets of the kingdom'. Jesus is not teaching anything different to his disciples. He is explaining a lot more to his disciples because they are ready to dig deeper.

 

 

But what can I do about Hans' anger?? Ces't la vie.

[Guest Valk0010]

He said he was intentionally talking in riddles and then he explained them to his inner group. That's not talking openly. By talking openly, you talk openly about the things people don't understand in the open. You don't talk in secret by talking in the open. And you don't talk in the open by talking in secret. I think your comprehension skills are a bit off.

 

Yes, you are right. I am having a trouble comprehending what you are saying here.

Are you sure its not your god goggles? People even in real life say I have trouble with regular old english and I get what hans is saying. For something who likes quantum mechanics parables. What hans is saying shouldn't be past you.

And don't forget that I'm talking in riddles to hide the truth. I only reveal the truth to those who can hear.

And in dumbfuckistan that isn't being deceptive.

[Guest Valk0010]

yep god goggles.

 

I really do hope lurkers can see how totally empty post 2214 is.

 

I repeat. If god really cared about teaching people the ways of eternal life(or that was what was originally the teachings), he would have been as simplistic and too the point as possible. After all, god supposedly wanted all to be saved. Not exactly working very hard for that goal aye!

 

 

Ohh and there were times, iirc, that the disciples couldn't even understand the parables and jesus had to explain. If his inner core couldn't get it. Dumkfuck simpleton would definitely not had got it.

 

Parables and riddles can be the same depending on the audience.

[JayL]

Once again, if not too intrusive a question, why were you looking for God?

Christian family. Culture. Felt right at the time. Thought my parents had the truth. Wanted to believe because they believed.

 

So are your parents still Christians or have they given up as well?

[JayL]

yep god goggles.

 

I really do hope lurkers can see how totally empty post 2214 is.

 

 

 

The whole thing started because Hans accused Jesus of 'committing perjury' when he told the high priest that all his teachings were out in the open.

 

 

Hans is saying, 'Aha! Jesus explained the parables to his disciples while he did not expound on meanings behind his parables to general public. See not all of his teachings are out in the open!!!'

 

So I gave my analogy with teaching quantum mechanics. The grad students in my research group have the right mathematical background as well as time and opportunity to dig deeper than general public in the subject of quantum mechanics. But the main message of the quantum mechanics are all out there in my public lectures. If Hans comes around calling me lying asshole, I just have to say, you are not my grad student. You are on the level of general public. I must refer you to my public lectures. All you can understand and benefit from are out there.

 

But he still calls me a lying bastard. Oh well.... C'est la vie.

[Guest Valk0010]

Well here is why I agree with hans.

 

Lets say that the mass population of a country doesn't understand what a watch is.

 

Lets say that this watch is key to eternal bliss.

 

Lets say Prophet X starts giving out these watches to people. Prophet X only tells them it works like a sundial and has gears.

 

Prophet X gives 12 watches to his friends and makes sure they all get what the watch is for and how it works.

 

That suitation I described there, is more or less the exact thing jesus did with his teachings.

 

And that is quiet honestly not having all your teachings out in the open. It just isn't.

[JayL]

Well here is why I agree with hans.

 

Lets say that the mass population of a country doesn't understand what a watch is.

 

Lets say that this watch is key to eternal bliss.

 

Lets say Prophet X starts giving out these watches to people. Prophet X only tells them it works like a sundial and has gears.

 

Prophet X gives 12 watches to his friends and makes sure they all get what the watch is for and how it works.

 

That suitation I described there, is more or less the exact thing jesus did with his teachings.

 

And that is quiet honestly not having all your teachings out in the open. It just isn't.

 

 

What important teaching did Jesus give only to his disciples and not to the general public??

 

What important teaching was missed by the general public??

 

 

( Perhaps this is a good question to Hans as well ! )

[Ouroboros]

So are your parents still Christians or have they given up as well?

Won't help you to know.

[Ouroboros]

Well here is why I agree with hans.

 

Lets say that the mass population of a country doesn't understand what a watch is.

 

Lets say that this watch is key to eternal bliss.

 

Lets say Prophet X starts giving out these watches to people. Prophet X only tells them it works like a sundial and has gears.

 

Prophet X gives 12 watches to his friends and makes sure they all get what the watch is for and how it works.

 

That suitation I described there, is more or less the exact thing jesus did with his teachings.

 

And that is quiet honestly not having all your teachings out in the open. It just isn't.

 

 

What important teaching did Jesus give only to his disciples and not to the general public??

 

What important teaching was missed by the general public??

 

 

( Perhaps this is a good question to Hans as well ! )

You mean you want me to quote the Bible again, and you not reading it... Again?

 

In other words, just a waste of time.

 

Read the Bible instead. You might learn what I'm saying since you don't understand me anyway.

[Guest Valk0010]

Well here is why I agree with hans.

 

Lets say that the mass population of a country doesn't understand what a watch is.

 

Lets say that this watch is key to eternal bliss.

 

Lets say Prophet X starts giving out these watches to people. Prophet X only tells them it works like a sundial and has gears.

 

Prophet X gives 12 watches to his friends and makes sure they all get what the watch is for and how it works.

 

That suitation I described there, is more or less the exact thing jesus did with his teachings.

 

And that is quiet honestly not having all your teachings out in the open. It just isn't.

 

 

What important teaching did Jesus give only to his disciples and not to the general public??

 

What important teaching was missed by the general public??

 

 

( Perhaps this is a good question to Hans as well ! )

Matthew 15:1-16 and Mark 8. If the disciples aren't getting it, the surely the general public isn't.

 

Luke 18:34

 

The point is, he is teaching the truth more to his disciples then to everybody. And again the quote about "I teach in parables so they don't understand."

 

THe other bible stuff quotes by the likes of Centauri should suffice for our point now that you seem to get it.

[Spectrox]

Does anything happen that is outside God's control? No?

 

 

 

 

Is this a joke question?? Have you been reading any of my posts? Of course, PLENTY of things happen outside God's control - like ALL of evil that happen on the earth!

 

Is your God all-powerful or not? Does he intervene in the affairs of man or not?

 

If I was God and had made some humans and there was something that was screwing up their lives, you know what I'd do? I'd get rid of it. That's in my nature. That's morally correct. Your God is a collossal arse clown and almost certainly doesn't exist other than as an idea in a brain that has been put through several wash-spin cycles and hung out to dry.