God's Mighty Plan Of Salvation

[sdelsolray]

 

 

…

My mind speculates….

Yes it does.  Often.

[Roz]

 

Wow... you're now claiming that the first level of heaven (A) is the world (or the universe? heh).  The 2nd level B is our atmosphere?  C, outer space?  And also it could be another matter entirely, which is where your god (you claim it as christian, remember?) dwells?

 

And this is all pointing back where?  Oh of course, the bible.  You use the blue letter bible to substantiate your claim again.  Just like a muslim validates his claims through the koran. 

 

Damn, you've reverted to IH levels.

Roz, I have no idea what "third heaven" would be other than taking it somewhat literal. One heaven, two heavens, three heavens. My mind speculates this might mean more than one universe or sky that we see. Is this what theoretical physics/math is speculating? Good question.

 

 

Going to mellow my tone down, so I'll address this as concisely as I can.

 

Does the possibility of Paul's writings as just writings of a man (not divinely inspired) just like you enter into your speculations?  Your answer states that you're just speculating right now.  Did it ever occur to you that what Paul's writing about is just like thoughts, only written down?  Nothing more.  Just one human speculating about outer space.

 

This is why I fire at you, Gus, and every other christian here.  You all have made a claim that your god is the 1 true god, and that he sacrificed himself to himself to save mankind from the hell he's made because Adam and Eve failed his test.  You all claim that your holy book is the "true" holy book. 

 

Now, if your book is indeed "the one" and it says "if you ask anything in my name, I will give it" then why do YOU differ with other christians in literally thousands of things?  You and all the other christians have this "divine link" to god through your prayer.  Yet you all give differing answers to a lot of different things while still claiming your faith is the one true faith.

 

Did it ever occur to you that Paul just wrote what he liked down because it 'sounds nice and comforting to hear?'

[Roz]

How can you expect to have a discussion with the believers here in the Den if you're just going to act like an asshole? You must realize that the reason why believers are going to try to come up with reasons for why their god was justified in commanding the deaths of innocent children is because, according to their dogma, he MUST be totally good and they are desperate to believe that is the case.

 

You're dealing with sheep, who are trying to excuse their "totally good" shepherd for his extremely abusive behavior because, on some level, I imagine that they are terrified of what would happen if they were to see that abuse for what it actually is, not members of the Taliban.

 

 

I'll try to tone things down, but here's part of the reasons why I confront christians with this. 

http://www.christianforums.com/t7637438/

 

Would you kill someone if God told you to?  9 answered Yes, 26 answered No. 

 

The most chilling answers I've seen so far:  

 

Post 180:  Absolutely. If God commands you to do something, you sure better do it. You may not want to do it, and you have free will to decline or not, but I'm sure God's wrath won't be too far off. Just make sure that it is God commanding you, and not Satan or his demons. Test the voice, and make sure it is coming from God. If in doubt, don't do anything. God has his ways and I'm sure if it is really Him, He will make you know it with certainty.

 

Post 185:  Easily. We must do the will of god. Abraham was ready to sacrifice Isaac and that is the faith you must have. He loved his son and was saddened by the request but he put all his faith in god and his divine will. I have faith that god is acting in the best interest of humanity and I will not get in his way.

[Guest end3]

 

 

Wow... you're now claiming that the first level of heaven (A) is the world (or the universe? heh).  The 2nd level B is our atmosphere?  C, outer space?  And also it could be another matter entirely, which is where your god (you claim it as christian, remember?) dwells?

 

And this is all pointing back where?  Oh of course, the bible.  You use the blue letter bible to substantiate your claim again.  Just like a muslim validates his claims through the koran. 

 

Damn, you've reverted to IH levels.

Roz, I have no idea what "third heaven" would be other than taking it somewhat literal. One heaven, two heavens, three heavens. My mind speculates this might mean more than one universe or sky that we see. Is this what theoretical physics/math is speculating? Good question.

 

 

Going to mellow my tone down, so I'll address this as concisely as I can.

 

Does the possibility of Paul's writings as just writings of a man (not divinely inspired) just like you enter into your speculations?  Your answer states that you're just speculating right now.  Did it ever occur to you that what Paul's writing about is just like thoughts, only written down?  Nothing more.  Just one human speculating about outer space.

 

This is why I fire at you, Gus, and every other christian here.  You all have made a claim that your god is the 1 true god, and that he sacrificed himself to himself to save mankind from the hell he's made because Adam and Eve failed his test.  You all claim that your holy book is the "true" holy book. 

 

Now, if your book is indeed "the one" and it says "if you ask anything in my name, I will give it" then why do YOU differ with other christians in literally thousands of things?  You and all the other christians have this "divine link" to god through your prayer.  Yet you all give differing answers to a lot of different things while still claiming your faith is the one true faith.

 

Did it ever occur to you that Paul just wrote what he liked down because it 'sounds nice and comforting to hear?'

 

I am unique, IH, you, TRP, we are all unique....if not by production, then certainly by circumstance. Why should we read and understand everything the same? Even the Bible suggests it's a process and not an event. Even Paul asks himself why he does the things he does. This is not an irrational set of thoughts.

[Roz]

 

I am unique, IH, you, TRP, we are all unique....if not by production, then certainly by circumstance. Why should we read and understand everything the same? Even the Bible suggests it's a process and not an event. Even Paul asks himself why he does the things he does. This is not an irrational set of thoughts.

 

 

That is precisely the point as to why TRP, BAA, myself, and other non believers are varying in our views.  There's no 1 faith, 1 hope, 1 baptism shared between us.  We are all freethinkers in that we have no sets of dogma we imposed on ourselves.

 

Yet christians DO.  You have 1 faith, 1 hope, 1 baptism, and you all claim that "¹⁶ All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,"

 

This is why morality comes into play.  Your god in your scripture ordered atrocities and they were committed by his own people.  It is recorded in your book.  Now, if we were to take your book as "god-breathed" then what is the reason he killed children? 

 

This is why I asked you these questions some time ago, I've also asked them to Gus, IH, and other christians.  You all hold onto a set of beliefs that recorded all of these things, and all of you claim that nothing can budge you from it.

 

I can only speak for myself, but I hold no belief sacred.  It is to be tested against evidence and reason.  If the idea I hold doesn't pass muster, then it is discarded, whatever it is.  Beyond that, I am comfortable with the answer of "I don't know." 

[Roz]

As to myself accusing End3, Gus, and every other christian of rape and murder, I offer my apologies, it was made in the heat of the moment.  Take it as you wish, I will try and tone it down but I will not just give a pass to the question "why did your god order children killed" and others like it.

[mymistake]

2Co 12:2

 

I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know—God knows.

 

And reasonably sure the word heaven here translates to "universe".

 

 

That is not possible.  Back when it was written people thought the sky was a dome.  They thought the stars were things that crawl across the solid dome.  There is no way they could have talked about information that was not discovered until modern times.

[Guest end3]

 

I am unique, IH, you, TRP, we are all unique....if not by production, then certainly by circumstance. Why should we read and understand everything the same? Even the Bible suggests it's a process and not an event. Even Paul asks himself why he does the things he does. This is not an irrational set of thoughts.

 

That is precisely the point as to why TRP, BAA, myself, and other non believers are varying in our views.  There's no 1 faith, 1 hope, 1 baptism shared between us.  We are all freethinkers in that we have no sets of dogma we imposed on ourselves.

 

Yet christians DO.  You have 1 faith, 1 hope, 1 baptism, and you all claim that "¹⁶ All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,"

 

This is why morality comes into play.  Your god in your scripture ordered atrocities and they were committed by his own people.  It is recorded in your book.  Now, if we were to take your book as "god-breathed" then what is the reason he killed children? 

 

This is why I asked you these questions some time ago, I've also asked them to Gus, IH, and other christians.  You all hold onto a set of beliefs that recorded all of these things, and all of you claim that nothing can budge you from it.

 

I can only speak for myself, but I hold no belief sacred.  It is to be tested against evidence and reason.  If the idea I hold doesn't pass muster, then it is discarded, whatever it is.  Beyond that, I am comfortable with the answer of "I don't know."

 

I gave you a guess....genetics. Watching the PM of Israel this morning. He was stating that that "group" (Hezbollah), of people have NO ability to believe any other way than to kill the Jewish people. Is this the same reasoning God used? I don't know Roz. It's speculation on my part. To summarize, science says nature and nurture changes people in a way that won't revert back for generations. So what happens when you impose multiple generations with this same set of behaviors? Revert back to what?, and when? It's a damn difficult concept that mixes morality and science and speculation. I don't know the final answer, but I can see how they may possibly relate to each other. Same set of speculation with the "translations/definitions" of heaven and universe and multiverse. Don't shoot me, it's just the connections my mind makes....

[Roz]

 

 

I am unique, IH, you, TRP, we are all unique....if not by production, then certainly by circumstance. Why should we read and understand everything the same? Even the Bible suggests it's a process and not an event. Even Paul asks himself why he does the things he does. This is not an irrational set of thoughts.

 

That is precisely the point as to why TRP, BAA, myself, and other non believers are varying in our views.  There's no 1 faith, 1 hope, 1 baptism shared between us.  We are all freethinkers in that we have no sets of dogma we imposed on ourselves.

 

Yet christians DO.  You have 1 faith, 1 hope, 1 baptism, and you all claim that "¹⁶ All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,"

 

This is why morality comes into play.  Your god in your scripture ordered atrocities and they were committed by his own people.  It is recorded in your book.  Now, if we were to take your book as "god-breathed" then what is the reason he killed children? 

 

This is why I asked you these questions some time ago, I've also asked them to Gus, IH, and other christians.  You all hold onto a set of beliefs that recorded all of these things, and all of you claim that nothing can budge you from it.

 

I can only speak for myself, but I hold no belief sacred.  It is to be tested against evidence and reason.  If the idea I hold doesn't pass muster, then it is discarded, whatever it is.  Beyond that, I am comfortable with the answer of "I don't know."

 

I gave you a guess....genetics. Watching the PM of Israel this morning. He was stating that that "group" (Hezbollah), of people have NO ability to believe any other way than to kill the Jewish people. Is this the same reasoning God used? I don't know Roz. It's speculation on my part. To summarize, science says nature and nurture changes people in a way that won't revert back for generations. So what happens when you impose multiple generations with this same set of behaviors? Revert back to what?, and when? It's a damn difficult concept that mixes morality and science and speculation. I don't know the final answer, but I can see how they may possibly relate to each other. Same set of speculation with the "translations/definitions" of heaven and universe and multiverse. Don't shoot me, it's just the connections my mind makes....

 

 

Would that be moral?  To do as your god did and order everyone killed?  You and I don't know the disposition of the canaanites, but we know what your god did.  He had it written in his own holy book. 

 

This is why these questions are in play.  If a modern day politician ever uttered the same words your god did "Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants" would you still vote for him/her?  If you were in the military and your co ordered something like that, would you do it? 

 

I'm guessing you wouldn't.  Why do you hold your god with a different set of standards then?

[Gus]

 

 

 

 

When God gave Adam unconditional authority over the earth, He gave him His word (Ps. 89:34). There were no strings attached. He didn’t say, “If you blow it, I’ll take back My power and authority.” No! God had to allow what man allowed. The Lord had given man total control over the earth. It was his to govern as he saw fit. Adam then yielded to Satan the power and authority God intended for man.

 

Gus,

 

If you can provide me with a scripture verse from the Genesis record wherein god explains to Adam that by eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam would yield his authority to satan, and bring Original Sin into the nature of humanity, then I am willing to accept this argument in its entirety.

 

If such a verse cannot be found in the book of Genesis, then this entire line of reasoning can be dismissed as unsupported by the text.

 

Take note, Gus; I do not care if some new testament writer explained it all 4,000 years after the fact.  I need to see god explaining it to Adam.  If god did not explain it to Adam personally, then my point that god planned the fall as a set-up from the beginning not only still stands, but is further supported by yet another vital piece of information that god witheld in order to ensure that Adam and Eve took the fall.

 

Again, Gus, we cannot simply read into the scripture what we think it should say.  I look forward to your response.

 

Cheers,

TheRedneckProfessor

 

HI RNP and sorry for late reply, I am busy (lots of people to train in the gym!) and can't be on this site that often.

 

I cannot provide you with a specific scripture from Genesis that says what you want it to, so if that is what you are looking for, sorry I cannot help and you are free to dismiss my theory.

 

However, I don’t think you need to have one as there is evidence through the bible that this is the case.

On numerous occasions Satan is credited with having some authority and power over the earth. His biggest claim was to Jesus himself that he could give him authority as it had been given to him. Of course, this claim itself may not be true as Satan is called 'the father of lies', but what is interesting is that Jesus did not discredited it. More like, his claim was a truth, but giving it up was the lie.

There are also references to him as God of this earth, prince of this world and the prince of the power of the air.

Satan does not own the earth, which is Gods. But he has authority to wield huge influence (on people, government and any man made systems) and has some power to affect it physically.

 

Another suggestion I gave only just had proposed to me is that Satan already had power on the earth before Adam and Eve fell from relationship with God, and when cast out of Eden, they effectively entered Satan’s domain. And this is what God is now rescuing us from.

The bible is not clear on when Satan was cast from heaven and onto the earth, it could have happened pre-genesis. Personally, I don't quit buy into this as it would not make sense for God put man on earth with the devil already lingering around. I still think he changed in the garden, and was originally sent there to minister to Adam and Eve.

 

Gus,

 

In the beginning, god said this to Adam and Eve:

 

²⁸ God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”

²⁹ Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. ³⁰ And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.  Genesis chapter 1

 

Then, according to your position, Adam gave the authority to Satan by eating the fruit.  Leaving aside that the serpent wasn't actually Satan (as has been demonstrated by myself and others), Adam did not actually give anything.  If we examine the text, we see that the serpent merely discussed the fruit with Eve, who then ate it and gave some to Adam.  If authority changed hands during the course of that activity, then at best, the authority was usurped by duplicitous means.  Adam is never seen in the text having a formal dialogue with the serpent; he therefore could not render the authority to Satan.  Eve did have a dialogue with the serpent; however the topic of authority didn't come up.

 

Nevertheless, long after these events, god said this to Noah:

 

¹Then God blessed Noah and his sons, saying to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth. ² The fear and dread of you will fall on all the beasts of the earth, and on all the birds in the sky, on every creature that moves along the ground, and on all the fish in the sea; they are given into your hands. ³ Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.

⁴ “But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it. ⁵ And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each human being, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of another human being.

⁶ “Whoever sheds human blood,

    by humans shall their blood be shed;

for in the image of God

    has God made mankind.

⁷ As for you, be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it.”

 

But... Wait a minute... I'm confused! 

 

Isn't this the exact same speech he made to Adam whenever he gave the exact same authority to him?  How was god able to give the exact same authority to Noah if that authority belonged to Satan?

 

Perhaps you should reconsider your position.

 

 

*Texts pulled from https://www.biblegateway.com/

 

 

 

Hi

 

Although the commands look similar they are about two different things.

 

In the first one, we see the words subdue and rule, of which Adam was given. This is absent from the second. Also, in the first God is saying that man will eat from seed bearing plants and fruit from trees, as will the animals.

 

In the second, God is now saying that man can eat animals as well, that is what God has given, not rule and dominion again. We can see this as he compares the giving of animals for food 'just as I gave you the green plants', and then adds the condition of the life blood.

 

This is probably why the fear and dread of man fell upon animals, as they were not being eaten prior to Noah.

 

With regards to the serpent being Satan or not, I think most likely it was, or whom else? It could be that this was just a term to describe his character, as he is also referred to a serpent in revelation (which directly says is the devil), a dragon, and a roaring lion.

 

If it was not Satan himself in person, he could have been working through some creature, probably some variation of the serpent we now know.

 

I don’t know how the authority changed hands, but as you have suggested, some duplicitous means seems reasonable, that is certainly the character of Satan, also known as a deceiver.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

Gus, I disagree.  god was clearly giving authority to Noah.  god may not have used words such as "subdue" or "dominion"; but god made it clear that he would even hold animals responsible for shedding the blood of a human.  If that is not placing Noah in a position of authority, then I wouldn't know how else to describe it.  Odd, though, that so many people have died throughout history from snake bites, spider bites, and the occasional shark attack.

[Roz]

Is Gus a young earth creationist (genesis is literal), an old earth creationist ('days' were 'eons'), or someone who accepts evolutionary theory and just thinks genesis is allegory?  Or some other form of christian speculation?

 

Any one of these conflicts with the other views within christianity, and these are not small minute differences in dogma. 

[Gus]

As to myself accusing End3, Gus, and every other christian of rape and murder, I offer my apologies, it was made in the heat of the moment.  Take it as you wish, I will try and tone it down but I will not just give a pass to the question "why did your god order children killed" and others like it.

Thank you Roz, I appreciate the apologie.

 

I will give an answer to your question then, but may not be for a few days now if thats okay.

[Roz]

It was out of line so it's only fair I apologize. 

 

Here's a question for any christian (not directed to anyone now, I realize just directing it to Gus excludes all others) 

1.  A young earth creationist (genesis is literal)

2.  an old earth creationist

3.  an old earth theist who accepts evolution (genesis as allegory)

 

I pose this because I think it ties into RNP's questions about genesis/Noah/the serpent.

[bornagainathiest]

2Co 12:2

 

I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know—God knows.

 

And reasonably sure the word heaven here translates to "universe".

 

But that cannot be empirically (and therefore, objectively) tested, End.

 

Recently you called out for objectivity, saying that the end had to be objective.

And herein lies the crux of the problem.  If you think you see a relationship or a connection, your thinking about it stays as something subjective until it can be tested by others.  Therefore, until the relationships and connections you think you see can be independently tested, on an equal basis, by anyone anywhere - they stay as subjective thoughts and opinions.  They don't become objective facts.

 

There may be some objective scientific tests that might be able to confirm the existence of a physical and natural multiverse.  But something supernatural, like heaven itself, or a level of heaven CANNOT be investigated by science - because science only investigates natural phenomenon, not supernatural ones.  So, once again, there's no objective means of testing what you're speculating about.  Your speculations remain subjective and can't become objective facts BECAUSE they can't be investigated.

 

Do you see that your subjective speculations aren't objective facts?

That something you believe to be true isn't true for anyone else until others can test it for themselves?

That the hurdle you, Ironhorse and Gus are all stumbling at is the difference between subjective beliefs (true for you, but not testable by anyone else) and objective facts (true for everyone else, because they are testable)...?

 

Thanks,

 

BAA

[SpaceWrangler]

I still don't get it. The serpent was a serpent. That's why god cursed snakes not any fallen angel.

 

As for Paul's levels of heaven..,

What you are seeing is mysticism. These ideas probably sprung from the Essenes, another Jewish sect and who owned the Dead Sea scrolls. "Paul" (and there is no proof of this man nor any other apostle/disciple being real) was probably written up by an essese. They as well as Gnostics believed in reincarnation and multiples.

 

When you discover that this was all based on more ancient Zoroastrianism, Platonism, Egyptology, Mithraism and jewdaism which were all based on sun, moon and astrotheology, you will see the signs.

 

And these books were written and edited by different people under those names.

[bornagainathiest]

ouranos

 

Outline of Biblical Usage

 

 

I.the vaulted expanse of the sky with all things visible in it

 

A.the universe, the world

 

 

B.the aerial heavens or sky, the region where the clouds and the tempests gather, and where thunder and lightning are produced

 

 

C.the sidereal or starry heavens

 

 

 

II.the region above the sidereal heavens, the seat of order of things eternal and consummately perfect where God dwells and other heavenly beings

 

Blue Letter Bible "tools". I am no language scholar

 

Please understand that this does not help us discover if the heavens referred to in scripture are at all related to the multiverse of cosmology.

This is simply a tool for understanding scripture - not for linking the Bible to the Higgs boson or to high-energy plasma physics.

 

These two things are oil and water, End.  

 

You cannot use a particle accelerator to discover the presence of angels in it's collision chamber.  Nor can prayer and fasting help you find the atomic weight of a trans-uranic element.

 

Science and religion are two separate and distinct disciplines! 

[bornagainathiest]

 

Wow... you're now claiming that the first level of heaven (A) is the world (or the universe? heh).  The 2nd level B is our atmosphere?  C, outer space?  And also it could be another matter entirely, which is where your god (you claim it as christian, remember?) dwells?

 

And this is all pointing back where?  Oh of course, the bible.  You use the blue letter bible to substantiate your claim again.  Just like a muslim validates his claims through the koran. 

 

Damn, you've reverted to IH levels.

Roz, I have no idea what "third heaven" would be other than taking it somewhat literal. One heaven, two heavens, three heavens. My mind speculates this might mean more than one universe or sky that we see. Is this what theoretical physics/math is speculating? Good question.

 

 

And your speculations remain as purely subjective things until they can be objectively tested, as I've already outlined.

 

The speculations of cosmologists and physicists deal only with the physical and the natural, not the spiritual and the supernatural.

 

Please, please, PLEASE try to understand that there is no crossover between science and religion, End!

[bornagainathiest]

 

 

 

Wow... you're now claiming that the first level of heaven (A) is the world (or the universe? heh).  The 2nd level B is our atmosphere?  C, outer space?  And also it could be another matter entirely, which is where your god (you claim it as christian, remember?) dwells?

 

And this is all pointing back where?  Oh of course, the bible.  You use the blue letter bible to substantiate your claim again.  Just like a muslim validates his claims through the koran. 

 

Damn, you've reverted to IH levels.

Roz, I have no idea what "third heaven" would be other than taking it somewhat literal. One heaven, two heavens, three heavens. My mind speculates this might mean more than one universe or sky that we see. Is this what theoretical physics/math is speculating? Good question.

 

 

Going to mellow my tone down, so I'll address this as concisely as I can.

 

Does the possibility of Paul's writings as just writings of a man (not divinely inspired) just like you enter into your speculations?  Your answer states that you're just speculating right now.  Did it ever occur to you that what Paul's writing about is just like thoughts, only written down?  Nothing more.  Just one human speculating about outer space.

 

This is why I fire at you, Gus, and every other christian here.  You all have made a claim that your god is the 1 true god, and that he sacrificed himself to himself to save mankind from the hell he's made because Adam and Eve failed his test.  You all claim that your holy book is the "true" holy book. 

 

Now, if your book is indeed "the one" and it says "if you ask anything in my name, I will give it" then why do YOU differ with other christians in literally thousands of things?  You and all the other christians have this "divine link" to god through your prayer.  Yet you all give differing answers to a lot of different things while still claiming your faith is the one true faith.

 

Did it ever occur to you that Paul just wrote what he liked down because it 'sounds nice and comforting to hear?'

 

I am unique, IH, you, TRP, we are all unique....if not by production, then certainly by circumstance. Why should we read and understand everything the same? Even the Bible suggests it's a process and not an event. Even Paul asks himself why he does the things he does. This is not an irrational set of thoughts.

 

 

Attaboy End!

You're right on the money... and you didn't even know it.

 

If you want to deal with subjective things like speculation and opinion, then everyone needn't understand everything the same.

 

But if you want to be objective, then everyone needs to put their subjectivity aside and try to be as objective as possible.

That's what the scientific drive for objectivity is all about.  That's why anyone can do science - provided they agree to abide by it's rules.  I said almost exactly this, here... http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/63204-free-will/page-15#.U8LZgfldVzM ...in posts # 290 and # 305.

 

So, if the end you want is objectivity, you put your subjective thoughts, opinions and speculations aside and deal ONLY with what's common to everyone.  Which is empirical scientific testing that anyone, anywhere can do.

 

You were exactly right with this, End

 

"No Roz, if there is no objective end, then it's all make believe...suiting your "religious" beliefs..."

 

Without objectivity, your subjective speculations are as good as make believe, because you make them to suit your religious beliefs, not so that others can objectively test them. 

[bornagainathiest]

 

 

I am unique, IH, you, TRP, we are all unique....if not by production, then certainly by circumstance. Why should we read and understand everything the same? Even the Bible suggests it's a process and not an event. Even Paul asks himself why he does the things he does. This is not an irrational set of thoughts.

 

That is precisely the point as to why TRP, BAA, myself, and other non believers are varying in our views.  There's no 1 faith, 1 hope, 1 baptism shared between us.  We are all freethinkers in that we have no sets of dogma we imposed on ourselves.

 

Yet christians DO.  You have 1 faith, 1 hope, 1 baptism, and you all claim that "¹⁶ All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,"

 

This is why morality comes into play.  Your god in your scripture ordered atrocities and they were committed by his own people.  It is recorded in your book.  Now, if we were to take your book as "god-breathed" then what is the reason he killed children? 

 

This is why I asked you these questions some time ago, I've also asked them to Gus, IH, and other christians.  You all hold onto a set of beliefs that recorded all of these things, and all of you claim that nothing can budge you from it.

 

I can only speak for myself, but I hold no belief sacred.  It is to be tested against evidence and reason.  If the idea I hold doesn't pass muster, then it is discarded, whatever it is.  Beyond that, I am comfortable with the answer of "I don't know."

 

I gave you a guess....genetics. Watching the PM of Israel this morning. He was stating that that "group" (Hezbollah), of people have NO ability to believe any other way than to kill the Jewish people. Is this the same reasoning God used? I don't know Roz. It's speculation on my part. To summarize, science says nature and nurture changes people in a way that won't revert back for generations. So what happens when you impose multiple generations with this same set of behaviors? Revert back to what?, and when? It's a damn difficult concept that mixes morality and science and speculation. I don't know the final answer, but I can see how they may possibly relate to each other. Same set of speculation with the "translations/definitions" of heaven and universe and multiverse. Don't shoot me, it's just the connections my mind makes....

 

 

These connections remain subjective - unless you can find a way that anyone else can test them.

[Guest end3]

Blasting off in my rocket ship day after tomorrow headed for the edge of the universe. My intent is to see the second heaven. Will send wave communication back on occasion. First think I have to accomplish is slingshot around Uranus....

 

Love to all,

 

End3

[midniterider]

Blasting off in my rocket ship day after tomorrow headed for the edge of the universe. My intent is to see the second heaven. Will send wave communication back on occasion. First think I have to accomplish is slingshot around Uranus....

 

Love to all,

 

End3

 

Ground Control to Major End....

[Thought2Much]

This is probably why the fear and dread of man fell upon animals, as they were not being eaten prior to Noah.

 

So, Abel and others just sacrificed animals because God liked them to, and not because people ate them? That's an odd position to take. And don't forget that God himself made clothes for Adam and Eve out of animal skins? You don't think that Adam's descendents continued making clothes out of animal skins?

 

Boy, the lame excuses that Christians will come up with to justify random pieces of ancient mythological text...

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

This is probably why the fear and dread of man fell upon animals, as they were not being eaten prior to Noah.

 

So, Abel and others just sacrificed animals because God liked them to, and not because people ate them? That's an odd position to take. And don't forget that God himself made clothes for Adam and Eve out of animal skins? You don't think that Adam's descendents continued making clothes out of animal skins?

 

Boy, the lame excuses that Christians will come up with to justify random pieces of ancient mythological text...

 

Don't forget that Noah himself was commanded by god to take seven of each of the "clean" animals.  How would Noah have known which ones were "clean" if they didn't eat meat?

[sdelsolray]

Gus,

 

I going to summarize a few of the claims you made in this thread and how you have dealt with them.  This is nothing personal.  It is simply a review of the actual evidence supporting my claim that you merely assert your subjective religious beliefs and when called to support those claims with evidence you fail to provide that evidence and simply repeat the mere assertions.

 

It starts with your earlier post in this thread (post #19) in which you made the following claim:

 

 

...

The cause of all sin was Satan, and Satan alone.

...

 

To support this claim you provided the following (again in post #19):

 

 

...

Lucifer was most likely sent to the garden to minster and care for Adam and Eve. He had not yet fallen.

If God put Adam and Eve in with the Devil as a dangerous adversary, it would be foolish.

But somewhere, Lucifer saw an opportunity to gain power. Knowing he could never take on God directly, he saw God give earth to Adam.

So he saw this as an opportunity to gain power by taking it from Adam. Hence why he is called the ‘prince of this earth’.

God could not just take it back, as it was legally satan’s now, and God does not go back on his word.

So Jesus had to come to take it back as a man, as it had been given to man.

...

 

Of course, this is not evidence.  It is merely a collection of more assertions and some subjective opinion.  More importantly, none of it deals with your original claim "The cause of all sin was Satan, and Satan alone."

 

Nevertheless, you conclude Post #19 with the following conclusion:

 

 

Lucifer, now Satan, is the author of the evil we see, not God.

 

Well, you may "see".  I fail to see any support for your claim.

 

After a few posters challenged you on this and a few other things, you stated, in Post #69:

 

 

...

I don’t really want to get into a battle over your points. I don’t agree with them myself (certainly not about the serpent not be Lucifer), but I wont argue the point further.

...

 

So, you won't discuss the challenge any further.  I guess that's because you wanted to return to simply making more claims (in post #69):

 

 

...

The Lord had given man total control over the earth. It was his to govern as he saw fit. Adam then yielded to Satan the power and authority God intended for man.

...

In an attempt to show that Satan is the sole creator of evil, you employ additional unsupported claims that are non-sequiturs.  How convincing.

 

But wait, it gets better.  In post #98, in response to a request for Biblical support of your claims, you stated the following:

 

 

...

I cannot provide you with a specific scripture from Genesis that says what you want it to, so if that is what you are looking for, sorry I cannot help and you are free to dismiss my theory.

...

 

OK, your claims are dismissed.  But not by you.  In an effort to support your claims that (i) Adam gave Satan power or (ii) Satan took that power from Adam (you make both claims), you provided the following "evidence" in Post # 98:

 

 

...

However, I don’t think you need to have one as there is evidence through the bible that this is the case.

On numerous occasions Satan is credited with having some authority and power over the earth. His biggest claim was to Jesus himself that he could give him authority as it had been given to him. Of course, this claim itself may not be true as Satan is called 'the father of lies', but what is interesting is that Jesus did not discredited it. More like, his claim was a truth, but giving it up was the lie.

There are also references to him as God of this earth, prince of this world and the prince of the power of the air.

Satan does not own the earth, which is Gods. But he has authority to wield huge influence (on people, government and any man made systems) and has some power to affect it physically.

…

Which isn't evidence at all, but simply another collection of claims and your subjective opinions.

 

Finally, in response to further questions about this, you stated the following (in Post #160):

 

 

...

I don’t know how the authority changed hands, but as you have suggested, some duplicitous means seems reasonable, that is certainly the character of Satan, also known as a deceiver.

 

You don't know how, but you are still certain of your claims.

 

Notice how none of this is support for your original claim, "The cause of all sin was Satan, and Satan alone."

Notice also that you provided no evidence for your subsequent claims.

 

In the world of rational and critical thinking, you have merely stated some of your personal religious beliefs.  You made several claims and failed to provide any relevant evidence to support them.  When challenged, you either refused to discuss the challenge or simply made more unsupported assertions.

 

You may wish to consider the effectiveness of your debating tactics.