God Is A Liar

[Guest end3]

 

 

 

Didn't really want to go down this path Prof, but if you insist. Define how long it would take to set the sun and the earth to "let there be light" and "separate the waters", etc. per physics today. So how would you like to define this discussion....with an open mind or acknowledging things we can't define nor prove.

Concerning the sun and earth and waters it would take billions of years, I would think.  BAA or Bhim would be more qualified to answer.

 

As far as defining this discussion, I'm leery of even having it in the first place, given the enormity of things we can't define or prove.

 

Then I don't know why you are concerned with marrying the two, the Christian account vs. science.

 

'bout the only thing I can think of to add is we know our language changes routinely and can only think what differences now vs. thousands of years ago...

 

I'm not trying to marry the two.  I'm simply saying that the text calls a morning and an evening a day, which coincides with what we know of as a day.  The earth rotates in roughly a 24 hour period, which gives us a morning and an evening.

 

Yes, as I just stated...."with what we know of a day"

 

My answer to the overall post is how are you going to get humanity to understand except to experience it themselves. He was already there with them and said don't do it.....yet they did. If he said you will really get in trouble or you will die or you will burn in hell for eternity, it wouldn't matter.....as it doesn't matter today. Pretty much end of story.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

 

 

 

Didn't really want to go down this path Prof, but if you insist. Define how long it would take to set the sun and the earth to "let there be light" and "separate the waters", etc. per physics today. So how would you like to define this discussion....with an open mind or acknowledging things we can't define nor prove.

Concerning the sun and earth and waters it would take billions of years, I would think.  BAA or Bhim would be more qualified to answer.

 

As far as defining this discussion, I'm leery of even having it in the first place, given the enormity of things we can't define or prove.

 

Then I don't know why you are concerned with marrying the two, the Christian account vs. science.

 

'bout the only thing I can think of to add is we know our language changes routinely and can only think what differences now vs. thousands of years ago...

 

I'm not trying to marry the two.  I'm simply saying that the text calls a morning and an evening a day, which coincides with what we know of as a day.  The earth rotates in roughly a 24 hour period, which gives us a morning and an evening.

 

Yes, as I just stated...."with what we know of a day"

 

My answer to the overall post is how are you going to get humanity to understand except to experience it themselves. He was already there with them and said don't do it.....yet they did. If he said you will really get in trouble or you will die or you will burn in hell for eternity, it wouldn't matter.....as it doesn't matter today. Pretty much end of story.

 

Then it goes back to "Why even plant the tree?"; which can be carried back even further to "Why create evil in the first place?"  

 

It also raises the question, "Why would god need for us to experience evil knowing that it would mean the majority of us would end up in eternal damnation?"

[Guest end3]

 

 

 

 

 

Didn't really want to go down this path Prof, but if you insist. Define how long it would take to set the sun and the earth to "let there be light" and "separate the waters", etc. per physics today. So how would you like to define this discussion....with an open mind or acknowledging things we can't define nor prove.

Concerning the sun and earth and waters it would take billions of years, I would think.  BAA or Bhim would be more qualified to answer.

 

As far as defining this discussion, I'm leery of even having it in the first place, given the enormity of things we can't define or prove.

 

Then I don't know why you are concerned with marrying the two, the Christian account vs. science.

 

'bout the only thing I can think of to add is we know our language changes routinely and can only think what differences now vs. thousands of years ago...

 

I'm not trying to marry the two.  I'm simply saying that the text calls a morning and an evening a day, which coincides with what we know of as a day.  The earth rotates in roughly a 24 hour period, which gives us a morning and an evening.

 

Yes, as I just stated...."with what we know of a day"

 

My answer to the overall post is how are you going to get humanity to understand except to experience it themselves. He was already there with them and said don't do it.....yet they did. If he said you will really get in trouble or you will die or you will burn in hell for eternity, it wouldn't matter.....as it doesn't matter today. Pretty much end of story.

 

Then it goes back to "Why even plant the tree?"; which can be carried back even further to "Why create evil in the first place?"  

 

It also raises the question, "Why would god need for us to experience evil knowing that it would mean the majority of us would end up in eternal damnation?"

 

The speculative answer would be....who are you going to hang out with if you are God. What created entity would satisfy that relationship.

 

Don't shoot me. Be proud that I have thought about it before and actually have a thought.

[MerryG]

It also raises the question, "Why would god need for us to experience evil knowing that it would mean the majority of us would end up in eternal damnation?"

 

 

And if he did see the need to create evil, hell, heaven, talking serpents, et al., why couldn't he have been more clear in explaining his terms to his human creations?

 

It really is dirty pool to plant a forbidden tree in front of human beings whose human nature you yourself created and know better than they know, then order them not to do what you already know darned well they will do.

 

It's even dirtier pool to expect them to know the difference between good and evil when you yourself placed all knowledge of the difference between good and evil into the fruit that you're forbidding the poor ignorant humans to consume.

 

It's nuts to threaten them with death when they haven't got the foggiest idea what death is because it's never existed in their world.

[Guest end3]

 

It also raises the question, "Why would god need for us to experience evil knowing that it would mean the majority of us would end up in eternal damnation?"

 

And if he did see the need to create evil, hell, heaven, talking serpents, et al., why couldn't he have been more clear in explaining his terms to his human creations?

 

It really is dirty pool to plant a forbidden tree in front of human beings whose human nature you yourself created and know better than they know, then order them not to do what you already know darned well they will do.

 

It's even dirtier pool to expect them to know the difference between good and evil when you yourself placed all knowledge of the difference between good and evil into the fruit that you're forbidding the poor ignorant humans to consume.

 

It's nuts to threaten them with death when they haven't got the foggiest idea what death is because it's never existed in their world.

 

Again Merry, how are you going to create another autonomous thing without giving them freedom to choose.

 

Hello, do you not think it was a plan to get them to KNOW God KNOWING what would happen. How are you going to get them to know God without exposing them?

[Fernweh]

End, you're alluding to the "day is a 1000 years long to god" found in Dispensationalism. Are you a Dispensationalist? That's a relatively new theology that's only been around for ~150 years. 

[waitingongod]

 

 

 

 

Didn't really want to go down this path Prof, but if you insist. Define how long it would take to set the sun and the earth to "let there be light" and "separate the waters", etc. per physics today. So how would you like to define this discussion....with an open mind or acknowledging things we can't define nor prove.

Concerning the sun and earth and waters it would take billions of years, I would think.  BAA or Bhim would be more qualified to answer.

 

As far as defining this discussion, I'm leery of even having it in the first place, given the enormity of things we can't define or prove.

 

Then I don't know why you are concerned with marrying the two, the Christian account vs. science.

 

'bout the only thing I can think of to add is we know our language changes routinely and can only think what differences now vs. thousands of years ago...

 

I'm not trying to marry the two.  I'm simply saying that the text calls a morning and an evening a day, which coincides with what we know of as a day.  The earth rotates in roughly a 24 hour period, which gives us a morning and an evening.

 

Yes, as I just stated...."with what we know of a day"

 

My answer to the overall post is how are you going to get humanity to understand except to experience it themselves. He was already there with them and said don't do it.....yet they did. If he said you will really get in trouble or you will die or you will burn in hell for eternity, it wouldn't matter.....as it doesn't matter today. Pretty much end of story.

 

Them doing was not wrong in any way.  They didn't have a concept of wrong or disobedience, they hadn't eaten the fruit.  The only way that concept would have even existed is if god created it.  So, god created evil so that man could choose, without knowing what evil was.  God then condemned all man to damnation because one man chose an option he had no reason to think of as an incorrect choice.

 

It all comes back to making an informed choice.  This is another good example of how the christian idea of choice is rather silly.  Adams got to make a choice between 2 things that would have appeared to the same, there was no right and wrong.  Having no knowledge of right and wrong, and god not bothering to fill him in, he...wait he didn't do anything.

 

Eve, who clearly was not informed of the arrangement between god and adam unless you want to add that to the text, actually started the whole thing.  She's even less informed than Adam.

 

So, we've got two incredibly uninformed individuals who decide to eat something that gives them the knowledge of good and evil, so by definition they couldn't have done anything wrong.  God gets super pissed for some reason, even though he forgot to properly present their "choices".  In his infinite mercy, he immediately condemns all humanity to an eternity of painful torture in hell, until he gets around to sending his kid (himself) back to commit suicide to save mankind from himself.

 

Now, the requirement is for mankind to believe in Jesus to be saved.  Not the several mile radius around where Jesus may have lived, but all mankind.  So, while we wait for the "good news" to spread, god is rapidly throwing people into a a fiery hell as fast as they can be born.

 

If that makes sense to you, okay.  I'll have to pass.

[MerryG]

 

 

It also raises the question, "Why would god need for us to experience evil knowing that it would mean the majority of us would end up in eternal damnation?"

 

And if he did see the need to create evil, hell, heaven, talking serpents, et al., why couldn't he have been more clear in explaining his terms to his human creations?

 

It really is dirty pool to plant a forbidden tree in front of human beings whose human nature you yourself created and know better than they know, then order them not to do what you already know darned well they will do.

 

It's even dirtier pool to expect them to know the difference between good and evil when you yourself placed all knowledge of the difference between good and evil into the fruit that you're forbidding the poor ignorant humans to consume.

 

It's nuts to threaten them with death when they haven't got the foggiest idea what death is because it's never existed in their world.

 

Again Merry, how are you going to create another autonomous thing without giving them freedom to choose.

 

Hello, do you not think it was a plan to get them to KNOW God KNOWING what would happen. How are you going to get them to know God without exposing them?

 

 

Freedom to choose what End3? "Hey, I'm going to create you with these inclinations so I know in advance you'll disobey me. I'm not going to give you the information you need to understand my commands. But boy howdy, am I gonna whack the crap out of you -- and all your descendents, and every innocent fish, bug, and animal on the planet -- the very first time you ever screw up."

 

This is free choice? This is informed choice? This is fair play?

[Guest end3]

 

 

 

It also raises the question, "Why would god need for us to experience evil knowing that it would mean the majority of us would end up in eternal damnation?"

 

And if he did see the need to create evil, hell, heaven, talking serpents, et al., why couldn't he have been more clear in explaining his terms to his human creations?

 

It really is dirty pool to plant a forbidden tree in front of human beings whose human nature you yourself created and know better than they know, then order them not to do what you already know darned well they will do.

 

It's even dirtier pool to expect them to know the difference between good and evil when you yourself placed all knowledge of the difference between good and evil into the fruit that you're forbidding the poor ignorant humans to consume.

 

It's nuts to threaten them with death when they haven't got the foggiest idea what death is because it's never existed in their world.

 

Again Merry, how are you going to create another autonomous thing without giving them freedom to choose.

 

Hello, do you not think it was a plan to get them to KNOW God KNOWING what would happen. How are you going to get them to know God without exposing them?

 

 

Freedom to choose what End3? "Hey, I'm going to create you with these inclinations so I know in advance you'll disobey me. I'm not going to give you the information you need to understand my commands. But boy howdy, am I gonna whack the crap out of you -- and all your descendents, and every innocent fish, bug, and animal on the planet -- the very first time you ever screw up."

 

This is free choice? This is informed choice? This is fair play?

 

Horse hockey Merry, we try desperately attempting to rear our children with "the knowledge" and it doesn't change things. So for ignorance or knowledge, it doesn't appear to matter....."knowing" is by experience.

[MerryG]

 

 

 

 

Freedom to choose what End3? "Hey, I'm going to create you with these inclinations so I know in advance you'll disobey me. I'm not going to give you the information you need to understand my commands. But boy howdy, am I gonna whack the crap out of you -- and all your descendents, and every innocent fish, bug, and animal on the planet -- the very first time you ever screw up."

 

This is free choice? This is informed choice? This is fair play?

 

Horse hockey Merry, we try desperately attempting to rear our children with "the knowledge" and it doesn't change things. So for ignorance or knowledge, it doesn't appear to matter....."knowing" is by experience.

 

 

And End3, "we" don't threaten to kill our children the first time they make a mistake. "We" don't slaughter them, their puppies, and their goldfish for their first act of naughtiness. "We" don't expect them to know what they haven't yet learned.

[Guest end3]

End, you're alluding to the "day is a 1000 years long to god" found in Dispensationalism. Are you a Dispensationalist? That's a relatively new theology that's only been around for ~150 years.

I'm unsure of my brand Fern. I think about the "tree of good and evil" as something that grows and runs it course. A tree would bear fruit, good and evil I expect. Is humanity the culmination of this particular tree?

 

Seriously, I'm not on drugs....just whacky thought patterns.

 

To your statement, I would have to review the particulars of dispensationalism..

[Guest end3]

 

 

 

 

Freedom to choose what End3? "Hey, I'm going to create you with these inclinations so I know in advance you'll disobey me. I'm not going to give you the information you need to understand my commands. But boy howdy, am I gonna whack the crap out of you -- and all your descendents, and every innocent fish, bug, and animal on the planet -- the very first time you ever screw up."

 

This is free choice? This is informed choice? This is fair play?

 

Horse hockey Merry, we try desperately attempting to rear our children with "the knowledge" and it doesn't change things. So for ignorance or knowledge, it doesn't appear to matter....."knowing" is by experience.

 

 

And End3, "we" don't threaten to kill our children the first time they make a mistake. "We" don't slaughter them, their puppies, and their goldfish for their first act of naughtiness. "We" don't expect them to know what they haven't yet learned.

 

In Abilene, TX two weeks ago they sent a young mother to prison for letting her child starve to death and wear the same diaper for so long that the child had severe burns on her body. Don't know what world you live in.

[MerryG]

 

 

 

 

 

Freedom to choose what End3? "Hey, I'm going to create you with these inclinations so I know in advance you'll disobey me. I'm not going to give you the information you need to understand my commands. But boy howdy, am I gonna whack the crap out of you -- and all your descendents, and every innocent fish, bug, and animal on the planet -- the very first time you ever screw up."

 

This is free choice? This is informed choice? This is fair play?

 

Horse hockey Merry, we try desperately attempting to rear our children with "the knowledge" and it doesn't change things. So for ignorance or knowledge, it doesn't appear to matter....."knowing" is by experience.

 

 

And End3, "we" don't threaten to kill our children the first time they make a mistake. "We" don't slaughter them, their puppies, and their goldfish for their first act of naughtiness. "We" don't expect them to know what they haven't yet learned.

 

In Abilene, TX two weeks ago they sent a young mother to prison for letting her child starve to death and wear the same diaper for so long that the child had severe burns on her body. Don't know what world you live in.

 

 

Okay, so that woman was as bad as god, then. Most humans are better than that.

 

It was you who first compared human child rearing with god's handling of Adam and Eve. I was just following your point. We both appeared to be talking then about responsible parenting or guidance, and I said (and still say) that the vast majority of human parents show more love, character, mercy, and decency than the god of Genesis.

 

But if you're going to bring up abusers, you're just making my point. If the god of the bible existed, he'd be the most savage abuser of all time -- the author of all suffering, all death, all torment.

[Fernweh]

 

End, you're alluding to the "day is a 1000 years long to god" found in Dispensationalism. Are you a Dispensationalist? That's a relatively new theology that's only been around for ~150 years.

I'm unsure of my brand Fern. I think about the "tree of good and evil" as something that grows and runs it course. A tree would bear fruit, good and evil I expect. Is humanity the culmination of this particular tree?

 

Seriously, I'm not on drugs....just whacky thought patterns.

 

To your statement, I would have to review the particulars of dispensationalism..

 

 

I think of the "tree of good and evil" as a myth sort of like Poseidon's trident.

[Guest end3]

 

 

 

 

 

Freedom to choose what End3? "Hey, I'm going to create you with these inclinations so I know in advance you'll disobey me. I'm not going to give you the information you need to understand my commands. But boy howdy, am I gonna whack the crap out of you -- and all your descendents, and every innocent fish, bug, and animal on the planet -- the very first time you ever screw up."

 

This is free choice? This is informed choice? This is fair play?

 

Horse hockey Merry, we try desperately attempting to rear our children with "the knowledge" and it doesn't change things. So for ignorance or knowledge, it doesn't appear to matter....."knowing" is by experience.

 

 

And End3, "we" don't threaten to kill our children the first time they make a mistake. "We" don't slaughter them, their puppies, and their goldfish for their first act of naughtiness. "We" don't expect them to know what they haven't yet learned.

 

In Abilene, TX two weeks ago they sent a young mother to prison for letting her child starve to death and wear the same diaper for so long that the child had severe burns on her body. Don't know what world you live in.

 

 

Okay, so that woman was as bad as god, then. Most humans are better than that.

 

It was you who first compared human child rearing with god's handling of Adam and Eve. I was just following your point. We both appeared to be talking then about responsible parenting or guidance, and I said (and still say) that the vast majority of human parents show more love, character, mercy, and decency than the god of Genesis.

 

But if you're going to bring up abusers, you're just making my point. If the god of the bible existed, he'd be the most savage abuser of all time -- the author of all suffering, all death, all torment.

 

Wasn't talking about abusers, was talking about creating an entity that could dwell with God and know Him.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

Wasn't talking about abusers, was talking about creating an entity that could dwell with God and know Him.

 

One of the underlying points of the original post was how impossible god made it for us to dwell with him and know him owing to his own dishonesty.

[MerryG]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Freedom to choose what End3? "Hey, I'm going to create you with these inclinations so I know in advance you'll disobey me. I'm not going to give you the information you need to understand my commands. But boy howdy, am I gonna whack the crap out of you -- and all your descendents, and every innocent fish, bug, and animal on the planet -- the very first time you ever screw up."

 

This is free choice? This is informed choice? This is fair play?

 

Horse hockey Merry, we try desperately attempting to rear our children with "the knowledge" and it doesn't change things. So for ignorance or knowledge, it doesn't appear to matter....."knowing" is by experience.

 

 

And End3, "we" don't threaten to kill our children the first time they make a mistake. "We" don't slaughter them, their puppies, and their goldfish for their first act of naughtiness. "We" don't expect them to know what they haven't yet learned.

 

In Abilene, TX two weeks ago they sent a young mother to prison for letting her child starve to death and wear the same diaper for so long that the child had severe burns on her body. Don't know what world you live in.

 

 

Okay, so that woman was as bad as god, then. Most humans are better than that.

 

It was you who first compared human child rearing with god's handling of Adam and Eve. I was just following your point. We both appeared to be talking then about responsible parenting or guidance, and I said (and still say) that the vast majority of human parents show more love, character, mercy, and decency than the god of Genesis.

 

But if you're going to bring up abusers, you're just making my point. If the god of the bible existed, he'd be the most savage abuser of all time -- the author of all suffering, all death, all torment.

 

Wasn't talking about abusers, was talking about creating an entity that could dwell with God and know Him.

 

 

Yes you were talking about abusers. You brought up that very subject (above, bolded, in red).

 

Before that you and I were talking about responsible ways of giving children (or children of god) guidance. You changed that subject really fast when I pointed out that god's ways were those of a super-abuser.

 

After all, the monster-woman in Texas "only" tortured and starved her own child to death. She didn't kill every living thing or threaten to. She didn't decree that all the world had to obey her -- but, "Neener, neener, I'm not going to give you enough information for you to make an informed decision."

 

You're pretty slick at subject-changing, End3.

[Guest end3]

 

Wasn't talking about abusers, was talking about creating an entity that could dwell with God and know Him.

One of the underlying points of the original post was how impossible god made it for us to dwell with him and know him owing to his own dishonesty.

 

Tell us how you would do it.

[Guest end3]

You're pretty slick at subject-changing, End3.

You just didn't read far enough back....not my responsibility for you not reading. See post where Prof asks why God put the tree....the following post. It's pure speculation Merry......within the same conversation.

[MerryG]

 

 

Wasn't talking about abusers, was talking about creating an entity that could dwell with God and know Him.

One of the underlying points of the original post was how impossible god made it for us to dwell with him and know him owing to his own dishonesty.

 

Tell us how you would do it.

 

 

Nobody here ever claimed they would do it or wanted to do it. Not one of us hankers to play god, far as I know. But for sure, if biblegod -- the perfect one and all -- wanted to create an entity that would "dwell with god and know him," he sure did screw up right from chapter one, right from First Man and First Woman.

 

There might have been a million different ways to achieve that goal of dwelling and knowing. But biblegod couldn't figure out any of them, apparently.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

The speculative answer would be....who are you going to hang out with if you are God. What created entity would satisfy that relationship.

Don't shoot me. Be proud that I have thought about it before and actually have a thought.

 

Why wouldn't god create another god to hang out with?  Better yet, why not create a goddess for himself?  He knew enough to declare that it wasn't good for man to be alone; why not give himself a little feminine companionship.

 

I'm pretty sure all the genocide and raping and smiting god did in the old testament was rooted in sexual frustration, on a side note.

[thereisnoperfect]

Well, if I wanted to create someone who could know me, I'd see if my wife also wanted to change our decision about children, and then I'd get her pregnant. And then as the child grew, I would spend time with her, care for her, teach her things, let her teach me things--you know, have a relationship with her. 

 

And because I know more than her, there would be rules, and consequences when she broke them. But I would seek to get her to understand those rules, and I would choose consequences based on how much she understood the rules. And of course my goal would be for us to someday be in an adult relationship in which we didn't need rules to mediate between us.

 

If I were an omnipotent, omniscient god, I would hope I could do at least as well as that.

[RipVanWinkle]

"don't know that it matters, but "IN that day thou shall surely die". Would have to rely on the word "in" and that one day is longer that our 24 hour day." end3

 

That's apologists' bullshit and you know it--or should. Why would god speak to humans about days in

language that made now sense to them? Unless of course his "word" is coded so nobody could be sure what

the hell he was referring to. Apologists are playing word games and you are swallowing it hook, line and

sinker.Think about it. If what you say is true it tells us nothing. If god wanted us not to know why

didn't he just say so? It's because the apologists are cooked if they read the bible for what it actually says. bill

[Guest end3]

 

The speculative answer would be....who are you going to hang out with if you are God. What created entity would satisfy that relationship.

 

Don't shoot me. Be proud that I have thought about it before and actually have a thought.

Why wouldn't god create another god to hang out with?  Better yet, why not create a goddess for himself?  He knew enough to declare that it wasn't good for man to be alone; why not give himself a little feminine companionship.

 

I'm pretty sure all the genocide and raping and smiting god did in the old testament was rooted in sexual frustration, on a side note.

 

I have thought that anything created would be less than the creator. That is the dilemma. As for creating a goddess, that is not a far stretch from saying he is creating the church, i.e all those that know him as his "goddess".....aka, the wife, the bride, etc.

[Guest end3]

"don't know that it matters, but "IN that day thou shall surely die". Would have to rely on the word "in" and that one day is longer that our 24 hour day." end3

 

That's apologists' bullshit and you know it--or should. Why would god speak to humans about days in

language that made now sense to them? Unless of course his "word" is coded so nobody could be sure what

the hell he was referring to. Apologists are playing word games and you are swallowing it hook, line and

sinker.Think about it. If what you say is true it tells us nothing. If god wanted us not to know why

didn't he just say so? It's because the apologists are cooked if they read the bible for what it actually says. bill

I try to marry science and Christianity Bill. No one likes the unions I find....lol. As an example to your statement, "down with that" meant you had a cold possibly but "down with that" now means you understand or ok with an idea. Need I mention "gay" and "queer" or "straight" as examples. I hear the frustration and it is acknowledged. I try not to do those cop out things....I don't like them myself