Christians, Free Will, and Evil

[Amanda]

She has refused to answer me in 4 different threads.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Midnight Star, it seems to me... as in your previous post regarding my posts... you were just expressing your opinions, as there were no questions for me. I respect your right to your opinions, I often allow them to stand on their own, different opinions are what make life interesting IMHO.

 

I also try to answer posts that seem genuinely sincere. Some posts seem to use me as an outlet to their anger/frustrations to what 'Christians' have done in their lives in their pasts... with which I often deeply empathize and share in their outrage for such behavior! It is ok that people vent their anger out on me here (not to mention PMs ), but it doesn't mean I HAVE to participate. None of which I'm saying involves you... as I really don't know you that well yet.

 

BTW, I've responded to one of your posts on a different forum today. Also, I've been out of town for a long weekend. I often leave town on weekends and usually do not have access to the internet. I apologize in responding late, it's NOT because I want to do so.

[a midnight star]

In other words you can not find biblical support to debunk my statements.

 

I was not the one who brought up the abuse. I somply found your answers on to why god allowed it offensive, so I said so.

 

Interesting how when I showed you the errors of you thoughts, it turned into "an outlet to their anger/frustrations to what 'Christians' have done in their lives in their pasts" and not sincre. This is an excuse to show that you can not debunk my statements.

[Cerise]

How do you reconcile this:

 

Jesus thought it not robbery to be equal to God... t

 

 

With this:

 

Luke 18:19 - And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none [is] good, save one, [that is], God.

 

When Jesus says that no one is good like God (in other words, equal) do you suppose he means that everyone is good like God?

[dogmatically_challenged]

Amanda. Are you starting to see why the bible can't be harmonized to anyones god concept? Its a hodge podge of different beliefs. Thats why if you support the bible then you also support the fundies beliefs. Bible problems are about the writers having different beliefs about some things.

 

Why don't you just take a razor blade to the bible and cut out all the junk and then add in what ever god tells you to. Youll meet your goals better that way.

[Amanda]

Cerise, regarding my statement in a post...

 

"Jesus thought it not robbery to be equal to God..."

 

you wrote...

How do you reconcile this:

With this:

 

Luke 18:19 - And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none [is] good, save one, [that is], God.

 

When Jesus says that no one is good like God (in other words, equal) do you suppose he means that everyone is good like God?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Cerise, it is my opinion that we are to be equal to God, as well as equal in God. Jesus seems to be saying, to not call him 'Good' Master as the ultimate finished product... as there are two more aspects to consider to finish this conclusion of 'good'. Jesus appears to be giving regards to the other two aspects of the manifestations of God also, and in God's completed form... that is to be called good... which I believe we are ALL a part.

 

The definition I think appropriate for this use of God can be found below, as well as the link to all the possible definitions given for God in this verse.

 

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/...316&version=kjv

 

2. the Godhead, trinity

a. God the Father, the first person in the trinity

b. Christ, the second person of the trinity

c. Holy Spirit, the third person in the trinity

[dogmatically_challenged]

Cerise, regarding my statement in a post...

 

"Jesus thought it not robbery to be equal to God..."

 

you wrote...

Cerise, it is my opinion that we are to be equal to God, as well as equal in God. Jesus seems to be saying, to not call him 'Good' Master as the ultimate finished product... as there are two more aspects to consider to finish this conclusion of 'good'. Jesus appears to be giving regards to the other two aspects of the manifestations of God also, and in God's completed form... that is to be called good... which I believe we are ALL a part.

 

The definition I think appropriate for this use of God can be found below, as well as the link to all the possible definitions given for God in this verse.

 

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/...316&version=kjv

 

2. the Godhead, trinity

   a. God the Father, the first person in the trinity

   b. Christ, the second person of the trinity

   c. Holy Spirit, the third person in the trinity

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yea, but your forgeting that the bible was written by different people of different times and locals. Let each bible writer speak for himself and never ASSume that they all had some magical connection with eachother in thier writings. The individual writers should be allowed to speak for themselves in thier accounts of thier godman. I'm not giving an opinion I'm pointing out what is reasonable and what is decent in allowing the writer to speak for themselves. No one got permission from any of the writers to throw thier work in with the works of the other writers.

 

Luke 18:19 - And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none [is] good, save one, [that is], God.

You are putting words in the writers mouth. Shame on you. Let Luke have his opinion. hehe.

 

Fact is they all had different beliefs about jesus at times. Fact. Not opinion.

 

Maybe this will help you. Read and absorb the whole page. hehe.

[Amanda]

Yea, but your forgeting that the bible was written by different people of different times and locals. Let each bible writer speak for himself and never ASSume that they all had some magical connection with eachother in thier writings. The individual writers should be allowed to speak for themselves in thier accounts of thier godman. I'm not giving an opinion I'm pointing out what is reasonable and what is decent in allowing the writer to speak for themselves. No one got permission from any of the writers to throw thier work in with the works of the other writers.

You are putting words in the writers mouth. Shame on you. Let Luke have his opinion. hehe.

 

Fact is they all had different beliefs about jesus at times. Fact. Not opinion.

Maybe this will help you. Read and absorb the whole page. hehe.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

DC, thanks for the site ... and it is hard to keep remembering what all those rules are... yet, I think visiting this site and reading enough posts... I'll become more aware of them, as well as understand them better.

 

DC, with all due respect... I am not putting words in Luke's mouth. The site I posted is the meanings of the original word used in its KJ translation to english. The language of that time was not as precise as ours and one word could have lots of meanings. Now we can go back and see these different meanings and determine which aspect of its definitions are more appropriate for that particular verse. That is why I posted the site in the lexicon for that word, so that it was evident that I chose one that IMO was the best one... yet leaving it up to the reader to view my options and determine if my decision was in agreement with them... or perhaps they see another option that better fits their understandings.

[dogmatically_challenged]

Cerise, regarding my statement in a post...

 

"Jesus thought it not robbery to be equal to God..."

 

you wrote...

Cerise, it is my opinion that we are to be equal to God, as well as equal in God. Jesus seems to be saying, to not call him 'Good' Master as the ultimate finished product... as there are two more aspects to consider to finish this conclusion of 'good'. Jesus appears to be giving regards to the other two aspects of the manifestations of God also, and in God's completed form... that is to be called good... which I believe we are ALL a part.

 

The definition I think appropriate for this use of God can be found below, as well as the link to all the possible definitions given for God in this verse.

 

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/...316&version=kjv

 

 

2. the Godhead, trinity

   a. God the Father, the first person in the trinity

   b. Christ, the second person of the trinity

   c. Holy Spirit, the third person in the trinity

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Cerise, it is my opinion that we are to be equal to God, as well as equal in God. Jesus seems to be saying, to not call him 'Good' Master as the ultimate finished product... as there are two more aspects to consider to finish this conclusion of 'good'. Jesus appears to be giving regards to the other two aspects of the manifestations of God also, and in God's completed form... that is to be called good... which I believe we are ALL a part.

There is nothing in what you got so far that would lead you to make such a statement as above. Nothing. Maybe elsewere in the N.T. a writer said something that will support your notion that we are to be equal to God, but this is not a common passage and so I'm not aware of it. Does not change the fact that you have no right to cherry pick from different writers without thier permision. They are not here to defend thier beliefs. Each individual writer should be allowed thier individual voice of THEIR opinions.

 

Luke 18:19 - And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none [is] good, save one, [that is], God.

This is what the writer of luke wrote and you most certainly are putting words in his mouth. He is not saying anything remotely close to what you are saying. I recomend you study the page I gave you.

 

What the heck ever gave you the idea that the bible writers who all lived in different times and different places would all tell the same story of jesus or that magically somehow there was a psychic connection so that they would all have to agree with eachother? I mean come on, get real. Let each writer speak for themselves as they are not here to defend thier belief. Criticize them but don't put words or ideas to thier own beliefs. They all disagree about jesus sometimes and they are all entitled to thier opinions. There is no way around this fact. The dipshits who put the bible together did not have the permision of any of the writers. You have no case what so ever for your theology just like no xer has for thier church dogmas that they grew up with.

[dogmatically_challenged]

Thomas Jefferson did just that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hehe! Amanda could do the same if she actually wanted a new age religion. But she can't use the bible as is because there will be passages that conradict her god concept.

[Cerise]

Cerise, regarding my statement in a post...

 

"Jesus thought it not robbery to be equal to God..."

 

you wrote...

Cerise, it is my opinion that we are to be equal to God, as well as equal in God. Jesus seems to be saying, to not call him 'Good' Master as the ultimate finished product... as there are two more aspects to consider to finish this conclusion of 'good'. Jesus appears to be giving regards to the other two aspects of the manifestations of God also, and in God's completed form... that is to be called good... which I believe we are ALL a part.

 

 

Why do you believe that man is an "unfinished product"? What draws you to this conclusion?

 

Can some parts of God contradict with other parts of God or must they all somehow harmonize?

[dogmatically_challenged]

Cerise

Can some parts of God contradict with other parts of God

If she answers yes then that will open up a whole new can of worms that a gentle person like her will not like.

[Cerise]

Well it might depend upon her concept of God in itself (which I'm not exactly certain of yet...it seems to shift in some wordings I haven't been able to sift through as much as I'd like). If God is, in a traditional sense, the all-powerful, perfect being, having contradicting parts would be a problem.

 

If God were more...imperfect, like a human, then contradiction might be a problem, but not an insurmountable one.

 

If God were something more like...a feeling, or spirit of morality, or something very incorpreal and strange like that...well I don't think I know what it would be like for a feeling to contradict itself. I don't think it could.

[dogmatically_challenged]

Well it might depend upon her concept of God in itself (which I'm not exactly certain of yet...it seems to shift in some wordings I haven't been able to sift through as much as I'd like).  If God is, in a traditional sense, the all-powerful, perfect being, having contradicting parts would be a problem.

 

If God were more...imperfect, like a human, then contradiction might be a problem, but not an insurmountable one.

If god can contradict itself then it can be a lier or insane. It then follows that there is no reason to trust that it will always love us. If god can contradict itself then there is no way for us to have confidence in any stability from it. Worship would be pointless because god could hurt us regardless of what we do or think. God would indeed be meaningless.

 

If God were something more like...a feeling, or spirit of morality, or something very incorpreal and strange like that...well I don't think I know what it would be like for a feeling to contradict itself.  I don't think it could.  

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

God is inside. Also God is more powerful as a verb or adjective than simply a noun. God should be intuitive without a book at all. A book is for handicapped lamers.

[Cerise]

How exactly would you use God as a verb?

 

Well honey, I'm off to god the plants.

Make sure you god the garage before you turn the hose on, dear.

 

 

ps. you should watch who you're talking to about books. I am a wacko book-lover. Books are a many splendoured thing. All you need are books!

[dogmatically_challenged]

How exactly would you use God as a verb?  

 

Well honey, I'm off to god the plants.

Make sure you god the garage before you turn the hose on, dear.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A verb is an action word. Yes? God is actions and intent that are useful and kind and not magical thinking or idle prattle. If we want the word to be worth anything. We are the only Gods in town.

[Cerise]

Technically...

 

speaking is an action.

 

Actually, to speak is a verb.

 

[dogmatically_challenged]

Technically...

 

speaking is an action.

 

Actually, to speak is a verb.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

See what I mean? You Canuck teachers are all grammer nazis. I got yall pegged.

[Cerise]

Aha, but I am not a teacher.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yet.

[Brother Jeff]

How exactly would you use God as a verb?

 

Well, god is love, right?

 

Honey, let's make god to each other.

 

I god you!

 

Elvis Presley's "God Me":

 

"Treat me like a fool,

Treat me mean and cruel,

Oh yeah, but god me

 

Break my faithful heart,

Tear it all apart,

Yeah, but god me!

 

WON'T YOU GOD ME?

 

If you ever go,

Darlin' I'll be oh, oh so lonely,

Beggin' on my knees,

All I ask is please,

Please god me!"

 

Or...

 

"Burning God"

 

"God Me Tender"

 

"I Can't Stop Godding You"

 

God gods you!

 

Jesus gods you!

 

I god chocolate!

 

I god my Lard and Slaver Jesus Kryasst... and so on...

[dogmatically_challenged]

You get what I mean! Outstanding! God is anything fun and worth while like having sex, or fishing, or driving your car at your cities track at insane speeds....God can be anything good! That goes for solving problems or helping people. No need to pray it just do it instead!

 

Knowing that we are Gods can be a way of explaining what we felt when we thought we were actualy praying to a magical being. Fact is we were praying to ourselves all along!

 

Cerise

If God were something more like...a feeling,

We don't have to actually use the word god to think of kind and useful actions and pleasures as divine. The feeling and the actions that follow are divine. That was my point really. Only we can do what is divine through our own actions and not through holybooks, prayers, or blindly following a church.

 

As I said God is inside. God should be intuitive without a book at all. A book is for handicapped lamers. God is actions and intent that are useful and kind and not magical thinking or idle prattle, if we want the word to be worth anything. We are the only Gods in town.

 

 

Brother Jeff! Thanks for helping me make my point!!

[Amanda]

Does not change the fact that you have no right to cherry pick from different writers without thier permision. They are not here to defend thier beliefs. Each individual writer should be allowed thier individual voice of THEIR opinions.

This is what the writer of luke wrote and you most certainly are putting words in his mouth.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I mean come on, get real. Let each writer speak for themselves as they are not here to defend thier belief. Criticize them but don't put words or ideas to thier own beliefs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

DC, if I let their words speak for themselves... or the manuscript from which the KJV translated... then we'd all have to read the Bible in Greek, Aramaic, and Hebrew! Or is presenting the Bible only in those foreign languages what you are trying to get me to do?

[Amanda]

Why do you believe that man is an "unfinished product"?  What draws you to this conclusion?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Cerise, do you think that man is through with his evolutionary process... much like some species seem to be? I've 'heard' that the alligator, the cockroach, and the shark have stayed the same for millions of years. IDK. I just happen to 'believe at this point' that we are still evolving mentally, physically, and spiritually.

 

Can some parts of God contradict with other parts of God or must they all somehow harmonize?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Cerise, good question! IDK... 'can' truth contradict truth? I don't think so...

[dogmatically_challenged]

DC, if I let their words speak for themselves... or the manuscript from which the KJV translated... then we'd all have to read the Bible in Greek, Aramaic, and Hebrew!     Or is presenting the Bible only in those foreign languages what you are trying to get me to do?  

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes. You are starting to understand. All the trouble that goes into making it so that everyday people can understand the bible writers clearly is all for naught. In translating the works of those writers everyone has an agenda...including you..........you heretic... Hehe!

 

The writers beliefs truly live in those langauges and no were else which is damning proof that the real creator, ( if there is one) does not give a rats ass about the beliefs of those writers whos works were slapped together in our bibles. Add to that the mollestation of thier individual and differing beliefs on god and jesus as well as history and understandings of the O.T. God does not give a rats ass if we understand what the bible writers believed. Otherwise god istelf would see to it we would know what the writers believed....individualy without any doubts what so ever. If you think you can show how" harmonious" these INDIVIDUAL writers were with eachother about god, jesus, O.T. understanings as well as O.T. history...then you are dillusional. I am sorry.

 

Only the spiritually handicapped need to pick up the droppings of the spiritual beliefs of others. Why not try a PERSONAL revelation DIRECTLY from higher power without a crutch like holybooks. That way you will be free to simply honor the beliefs of our ancestors faults and all. They were only human beings every one of them. Treat them that way. All of them. Even jesus...if he even existed that is. You are equal to them and need not tug at thier skirts.

[dogmatically_challenged]

How exactly would you use God as a verb?  

 

Well honey, I'm off to god the plants.

Make sure you god the garage before you turn the hose on, dear.

 

 

ps.  you should watch who you're talking to about books.  I am a wacko book-lover.  Books are a many splendoured thing.  All you need are books!  

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Books should be enjoyed and if they have any parts that are actually useful, (beyond relating to and enjoying the story or the thoughts of the writer)... should be applied in the real world if it can be done.

 

As far as any kind of revelation from a god a book is a counterfeit revelation especially if we are talking about a god who presumably IS love and exists everywere. In the case of such a god a book is nonsensical.

[Cerise]

Cerise, do you think that man is through with his evolutionary process... much like some species seem to be? I've 'heard' that the alligator, the cockroach, and the shark have stayed the same for millions of years. IDK. I just happen to 'believe at this point' that we are still evolving mentally, physically, and spiritually. 

 

Do you think there will be a point when we stop evolving (as a species I mean, not just because someone died)?

 

I don't think we are done evolving, but I also don't think this make man a damaged or incomplete product at this time. A wheel works perfectly well as an invention in itself. It is neither unfinish, nor incomplete just because sometime down the road someone will take that concept and turn it into a car.

 

 

Cerise, good question! IDK... 'can' truth contradict truth? I don't think so...

 

But life is contradiction. Humans especially, are contradictory creatures. How can contradiction be born from a deity who has no contradiction?

 

Truth is often a matter of perspective. If you ask someone if the ground is flat, their answers will be true, but different from their perspectives. Yes, this ground is flat, for when I set a ball on it, it does not roll. No, this ground is not flat, as the world is spherical in shape.