Jump to content

A Small Rant On Romans 9:20-21


Guest Valk0010
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Valk0010
20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”[h]21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

 

I call bullshit.

 

Isaiah 1:18

 

"Come now, let us reason together," says the LORD. "Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red as crimson, they shall be like wool.

 

If god gave us reason so we could know and understand him, then we should be allowed to criticise so that way if proven to be wrong one could have stronger reasons to believe.

 

I think people like CS lewis are full of it when they say, to use logic to question the author of logic is like cutting off the branch your sitting on.

 

If we are given the ability so that we could believe. The ability could only be valuable if questions and criticisms are allowed. It, in a Christian world would be a gift from god to have be able to use reason fully, that is because the knowledge of god is supposedly the ultimate goal.

 

To use a really cheap example. Say the problem of evil for example. A logical answer to that, would make way more people be able to believe and do what it says there is about "come now, let us reason together."

 

It is also wrong on a more secular front.

 

If the author of logic is a perfect being, then his decisions making and reasoning should be airtight perfect.

 

And since a lack of authority does not logically require in correctness. Then we are allowed to criticise the actions of the divine.

 

Thus ends my rant on romans 9:20-21

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good call.

 

The Romans passage is trying to shame people out of critical thinking. If it was valid reasoning and it was used by a false cult (from a Christian POV) then what is there to save the poor people who are snared by that cult? Christians usually don't think about that sort of thing on because those poor people have been snared by a cult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”[h]21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

 

I call bullshit.

 

Isaiah 1:18

 

"Come now, let us reason together," says the LORD. "Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red as crimson, they shall be like wool.

 

If god gave us reason so we could know and understand him, then we should be allowed to criticise so that way if proven to be wrong one could have stronger reasons to believe.

 

I think people like CS lewis are full of it when they say, to use logic to question the author of logic is like cutting off the branch your sitting on.

 

If we are given the ability so that we could believe. The ability could only be valuable if questions and criticisms are allowed. It, in a Christian world would be a gift from god to have be able to use reason fully, that is because the knowledge of god is supposedly the ultimate goal.

 

To use a really cheap example. Say the problem of evil for example. A logical answer to that, would make way more people be able to believe and do what it says there is about "come now, let us reason together."

 

It is also wrong on a more secular front.

 

If the author of logic is a perfect being, then his decisions making and reasoning should be airtight perfect.

 

And since a lack of authority does not logically require in correctness. Then we are allowed to criticise the actions of the divine.

 

Thus ends my rant on romans 9:20-21

 

How do you know that allowing humanity to make their own choices is not logically correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Valk0010
20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”[h]21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

 

I call bullshit.

 

Isaiah 1:18

 

"Come now, let us reason together," says the LORD. "Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red as crimson, they shall be like wool.

 

If god gave us reason so we could know and understand him, then we should be allowed to criticise so that way if proven to be wrong one could have stronger reasons to believe.

 

I think people like CS lewis are full of it when they say, to use logic to question the author of logic is like cutting off the branch your sitting on.

 

If we are given the ability so that we could believe. The ability could only be valuable if questions and criticisms are allowed. It, in a Christian world would be a gift from god to have be able to use reason fully, that is because the knowledge of god is supposedly the ultimate goal.

 

To use a really cheap example. Say the problem of evil for example. A logical answer to that, would make way more people be able to believe and do what it says there is about "come now, let us reason together."

 

It is also wrong on a more secular front.

 

If the author of logic is a perfect being, then his decisions making and reasoning should be airtight perfect.

 

And since a lack of authority does not logically require in correctness. Then we are allowed to criticise the actions of the divine.

 

Thus ends my rant on romans 9:20-21

 

How do you know that allowing humanity to make their own choices is not logically correct.

I think you missed my point. I am addressing the people who say things along the lines of the following. "Who are you to question god?" "Are you god?" I am addressing this to the people who say that.

 

The free will defense to the problem of evil, is buku bullshit, but that is not the topic of this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does that even mean? Obviously it's religious.

 

"How do you know that allowing humanity to make their own choices is not logically correct?"

 

What is logically correct?

 

If you mean how does the Bible contradict itself in this area then:

 

God desires that none should perish

Allowing humans to make choices results in most humans perishing

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you missed my point. I am addressing the people who say things along the lines of the following. "Who are you to question god?" "Are you god?" I am addressing this to the people who say that.

 

The free will defense to the problem of evil, is buku bullshit, but that is not the topic of this thread.

 

Let's suppose that God knows something we don't and the necessity is that in order for the outcome to be logical to God, then it is necessary for humanity to have free will. But the point is, you don't know the God's entire story, right? So how could you know whether giving humanity free will is logical or not with repect to God? Move it up a notch Valk. I have been impressed with your learning here lately. Good job sir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does that even mean? Obviously it's religious.

 

"How do you know that allowing humanity to make their own choices is not logically correct?"

 

What is logically correct?

 

If you mean how does the Bible contradict itself in this area then:

 

God desires that none should perish

Allowing humans to make choices results in most humans perishing

 

I've taken to believing that logically correct with repect to religion and humanity is that which produces life.

 

So, logically if He allows humanity to make choices, then the outcome is the group "none should perish"....right smart guy?

 

I oughta stand in for Rush being this damn smart.

 

As Bugs Bunny used to say...."What a nim cow poop. What a gulla -bull". LMAO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm confused. End, are you saying that you don't believe in Hell and that all humans go to heaven? If that is the case then you are not like most Christians. I would have to say good for you for rejecting the anti-justice concept of Hell.

 

If that isn't what you believe then could you please clarify your views on none should perish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Valk0010

I think you missed my point. I am addressing the people who say things along the lines of the following. "Who are you to question god?" "Are you god?" I am addressing this to the people who say that.

 

The free will defense to the problem of evil, is buku bullshit, but that is not the topic of this thread.

 

Let's suppose that God knows something we don't and the necessity is that in order for the outcome to be logical to God, then it is necessary for humanity to have free will. But the point is, you don't know the God's entire story, right? So how could you know whether giving humanity free will is logical or not with repect to God? Move it up a notch Valk. I have been impressed with your learning here lately. Good job sir.

 

Well it depends on the kind of criticisms you might want to make.

 

As far as I can see the free will defense is lousy for the following.

 

1. Imagine say your a apartment, and you hear someone screamed "I am being raped." And you tell to other people. I didn't stop the rape, I value free will. Most people would think your nuts. I am not sure how are perfect god could be a exception to that.

 

2. It bases its view on a false premise. Evil is required for free will. Evil is not neccesary for having a freedom to choose. Think for example how your in a supermarket and you can't find something you want. Your free will isn't violated. Much the same it is with actions. You take away certain actions as options you still have free will but within the actions that are left. Its the only way I could see one having free will in heaven. A good analogy would be Data from Star Trek. A guy who is programmed to only do good, but has free choice within the context of his program.

 

3. Free will in the sense its often argued by Christians, seems batshit to me at least. While we do have free will, we are the sum of our previous actions, thoughts and experiences and that effects are decision making abilities. Its why I would be a compatablist. And with that god doesn't have a out in creating us in such a way to where we choose to only act good.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Valk0010

And sceptical theism, the position you advocated in post 6. As far as I can see, that is the old, ignorance is all you need as evidence arguement that holds no water.

 

You got to provide a reason why we shouldn't know otherwise the arguement is fallacious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm confused. End, are you saying that you don't believe in Hell and that all humans go to heaven? If that is the case then you are not like most Christians. I would have to say good for you for rejecting the anti-justice concept of Hell.

 

If that isn't what you believe then could you please clarify your views on none should perish.

 

You gonna leave out half that verse? God's hope for repentence? The way I read that is God desires for us to repent that we not perish rather that God "wills" no one to perish. Also, I believe if there is an absolute good then there is certainly and absolute bad....hell if you wish. Wake up MM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm confused. End, are you saying that you don't believe in Hell and that all humans go to heaven? If that is the case then you are not like most Christians. I would have to say good for you for rejecting the anti-justice concept of Hell.

 

If that isn't what you believe then could you please clarify your views on none should perish.

 

You gonna leave out half that verse? God's hope for repentence? The way I read that is God desires for us to repent that we not perish rather that God "wills" no one to perish.

 

Then God is evil; like a Mafia Don. "I wish not that I would break his knee caps. I wish that instead he would pay off the loan. But he is free to make his own choices and if he prefers that I break his knee caps . . . well I have to respect his choice."

 

Also, I believe if there is an absolute good then there is certainly and absolute bad....hell if you wish. Wake up MM.

 

Maybe I'm not the one who needs to wake up. I can explain and defend my ideas. They have some merit.

 

Do you think an all knowing, all good, all powerful God realized that putting a forbidden tree in the garden of Eden would result in over 6 billion people burning in hell for eternity and then God did it anyway? I don't because such an idea is non-sensical. I really hope that you can see that too. A child could set up a better universe. Don't put the forbidden tree in the garden and then *bam* everybody goes to heaven.

 

You see the story of Eden was created to explain why humans suffer. It did not include concepts of a loving God or an afterlife. Those ideas were not even part of the religion back then. The theology became convoluted because the religion evolved over time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like to remind people that make that assertion that I'm not questioning god-- god being ill-inclined, or more likely unable to answer. I'm questioning the people that say that god is saying or doing a certain thing, because that's all I have to go to.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm confused. End, are you saying that you don't believe in Hell and that all humans go to heaven? If that is the case then you are not like most Christians. I would have to say good for you for rejecting the anti-justice concept of Hell.

 

If that isn't what you believe then could you please clarify your views on none should perish.

 

You gonna leave out half that verse? God's hope for repentence? The way I read that is God desires for us to repent that we not perish rather that God "wills" no one to perish.

 

Then God is evil; like a Mafia Don. "I wish not that I would break his knee caps. I wish that instead he would pay off the loan. But he is free to make his own choices and if he prefers that I break his knee caps . . . well I have to respect his choice."

 

Also, I believe if there is an absolute good then there is certainly and absolute bad....hell if you wish. Wake up MM.

 

 

 

You see the story of Eden was created to explain why humans suffer. It did not include concepts of a loving God or an afterlife. Those ideas were not even part of the religion back then. The theology became convoluted because the religion evolved over time.

 

This is it in a nutshell, End. You read later writings back into the original, and that is a no-no. Judeo-Christianity has hardly a single original, unborrowed concept in the whole of it. It's ended up being so widely accepted simply because it high jacked what was considered the best parts of other existing religions at the time and syncretized them into an amalgamated whole. Unless god gave divine truth to practically every religion, and not just J-C, your particular strain of magic doesn't hold up. An even if he did do that, he gave wildly contradictory messages, an should be sued for malpractice.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Valk0010

I like to remind people that make that assertion that I'm not questioning god-- god being ill-inclined, or more likely unable to answer. I'm questioning the people that say that god is saying or doing a certain thing, because that's all I have to go to.

I never noticed the difference, ahh that makes sense.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's suppose that God knows something we don't and the necessity is that in order for the outcome to be logical to God, then it is necessary for humanity to have free will. But the point is, you don't know the God's entire story, right? So how could you know whether giving humanity free will is logical or not with repect to God?

 

Let's suppose that God did indeed grant freewill. Then it's your responsibility that you have rebelled against him, you infidel. If you really cared about truth, then you'd submit to Islam.

 

See, any religion can play that game. If you set god X (any god that man conceives of) up as being beyond question, then there is no way to determine truth. If you would not accept your arguments from any other religion than your own, then your arguments are terrible arguments in and of themselves. They do absolutely nothing other than stroking your ego.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”[h]21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

 

I call bullshit.

 

Isaiah 1:18

 

"Come now, let us reason together," says the LORD. "Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red as crimson, they shall be like wool.

 

If god gave us reason so we could know and understand him, then we should be allowed to criticise so that way if proven to be wrong one could have stronger reasons to believe.

 

I think people like CS lewis are full of it when they say, to use logic to question the author of logic is like cutting off the branch your sitting on.

 

If we are given the ability so that we could believe. The ability could only be valuable if questions and criticisms are allowed. It, in a Christian world would be a gift from god to have be able to use reason fully, that is because the knowledge of god is supposedly the ultimate goal.

 

To use a really cheap example. Say the problem of evil for example. A logical answer to that, would make way more people be able to believe and do what it says there is about "come now, let us reason together."

 

It is also wrong on a more secular front.

 

If the author of logic is a perfect being, then his decisions making and reasoning should be airtight perfect.

 

And since a lack of authority does not logically require in correctness. Then we are allowed to criticise the actions of the divine.

 

Thus ends my rant on romans 9:20-21

 

How do you know that allowing humanity to make their own choices is not logically correct.

 

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you missed my point. I am addressing the people who say things along the lines of the following. "Who are you to question god?" "Are you god?" I am addressing this to the people who say that.

 

The free will defense to the problem of evil, is buku bullshit, but that is not the topic of this thread.

 

Let's suppose that God knows something we don't and the necessity is that in order for the outcome to be logical to God, then it is necessary for humanity to have free will. But the point is, you don't know the God's entire story, right? So how could you know whether giving humanity free will is logical or not with repect to God? Move it up a notch Valk. I have been impressed with your learning here lately. Good job sir.

 

+1

 

There is a weird definition for freedom of will out there so I use freedom of choice.

 

 

 

For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. 1 Cor 13:12

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm confused. End, are you saying that you don't believe in Hell and that all humans go to heaven? If that is the case then you are not like most Christians. I would have to say good for you for rejecting the anti-justice concept of Hell.

 

If that isn't what you believe then could you please clarify your views on none should perish.

 

You gonna leave out half that verse? God's hope for repentence? The way I read that is God desires for us to repent that we not perish rather that God "wills" no one to perish. Also, I believe if there is an absolute good then there is certainly and absolute bad....hell if you wish. Wake up MM.

 

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you missed my point. I am addressing the people who say things along the lines of the following. "Who are you to question god?" "Are you god?" I am addressing this to the people who say that.

 

The free will defense to the problem of evil, is buku bullshit, but that is not the topic of this thread.

But the point is, you don't know the God's entire story, right? So how could you know whether giving humanity free will is logical or not with repect to God?

 

But what has been asserted about god in the Bible is hogwash in the face of reason, science, history, archaeology, etc. So why should we even let some unknown untold story or explanation about gods purposes be a consideration?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Valk0010

I think you missed my point. I am addressing the people who say things along the lines of the following. "Who are you to question god?" "Are you god?" I am addressing this to the people who say that.

 

The free will defense to the problem of evil, is buku bullshit, but that is not the topic of this thread.

But the point is, you don't know the God's entire story, right? So how could you know whether giving humanity free will is logical or not with repect to God?

 

But what has been asserted about god in the Bible is hogwash in the face of reason, science, history, archaeology, etc. So why should we even let some unknown untold story or explanation about gods purposes be a consideration?

Well in his defense, the problem of evil arguement falls under the reason part of what you said.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.