things we can agree are right/wrong no matter our religions/beliefs what can we agree on?

[midniterider]

5 hours ago, SerenelyBlue said:

I would like to say, fuck you very much for coming here with your warped ideas of how to please a non existent god, because you fear hell and would genuinely like to put the fear of hell in others.

I hope you feel proud, you spineless coward.  At least we have the guts to step out of our faith and brave the world being ourselves come what may.

 

Salvation: A fake solution to a fake problem.

[Joefizz]

5 hours ago, SerenelyBlue said:

I would like to say, fuck you very much for coming here with your warped ideas of how to please a non existent god, because you fear hell and would genuinely like to put the fear of hell in others.

I hope you feel proud, you spineless coward.  At least we have the guts to step out of our faith and brave the world being ourselves come what may.

Actually as I've shared before that I do not promote nor do I practice any hell scare tactics,sure I believe hell and heaven must be taught and preached otherwise the doctrine is phony but I don't believe in forcing religion on anyone I believe that to be wrong,everyone has their own individual choices in life,and as I also stated before I am not here in a forcicve attempt to convert anyone to believe in God  though if anyone were to convert to being for God from a post of mine,I would be glad,but I am not a person on a mission to force people to believe in or serve God,nor am I here in a petty attempt to stop the function of this site I respect the main reason for this site and appreciate the intriguing discussions I have had and continue to have and also as for your guess that I fear hell,I have also made clear that I fear being destroyed body and soul more than hell,and though I'm aware that it's a place of eternal torment I don't fear it to any degree that I would make it my mission to warn everyone about it,because hell isn't supposed to be people's main focus in my opinion concerning anyone serving God the main focus should be upon Go and "Learning" the bible not spouting about hell in an attempt to scare people into submission,because that would be a contradiction to God's will as according to the bible.

[Joefizz]

6 hours ago, bornagainathiest said:

 

 

Joe,

 

Do you resolve the apparent contradiction between these two verses, by faith?

 

Exodus 32:14

So the LORD changed His mind about the harm which He said He would do to His people.

 

Numbers 23:19 

God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should change His mind. Does He speak and then not act? Does He promise and not fulfill?

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

 

 

 

 

 

No in my original king james version it says repent in place of your version's "change his mind" either way same difference in both scriptures, he is not speaking on the question of "if he has lied" in Numbers it is speaking on "what reason did God have to lie about or repent from his actions or otherwise" concerning "Barak",context is important he said "should" indicating he was giving reasons that Barak's fate was sealed,because yes God repented and has repented multiple times,but he was making clear that he had no reason to neither change his mind concerning overtaking Barak nor to be dishonest with him concerning overtaking him.

God is not in numbers claiming that he has never lied,nor  been deceptive,nor never repented,he is only speaking on that his order was final despite Barak's pleading through Balaam.

[Joefizz]

6 hours ago, bornagainathiest said:

 

A good thought, sdelsolray.  Thanks.

 

However, reliability needs to be very clearly and carefully defined, when it comes what is acceptable evidence and what isn't.

You see, a great many religious people will claim (wrongly) that science isn't reliable at all.  Not even one little bit.  Our visiting Christian (Stranger) was just such a person.  He would always rely on scripture over science.  Where scripture disagreed with science, scripture was relied on.  He even told us why,  in his own simplistically naive way.  Because science keeps on changing.  If science were true, then it should be absolutely true and unchanging  - like scripture.   

 

So adding reliability to equality, rationality and consistency is a good idea, but it has to be done... carefully. 

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

Yeah I understand what you mean BAA,despite my religion I don't discredit all science  many people  discredit science using simple scriptures,particularly out of context or using just one verse,science has had successes and helpful developments even concerning health,medicine,and other beneficial things,to just brush that off as "nothing" or "not true" is to be foolish,science has it's place too in the world,after all even God never said for anyone to be "helpless" or "not explore" or  to "not think for ourselves" I mean come on a whole planet and we aren't to explore it,use it's resources,or explore space,there is no scripture that disallows such things,so it's rather childish to not at least have respect for science or to not be civil when discussing coinciding subjects,for example a rainbow is known as an everlasting promise that God would never flood the entire earth again with intent on hurt,science calls a rainbow a form of multi colour gaseous result from rain,you know for a Christian this can be "both" if people would think open mindly.

[sdelsolray]

2 hours ago, Joefizz said:

...

for example a rainbow is known as an everlasting promise that God would never flood the entire earth again with intent on hurt,science calls a rainbow a form of multi colour gaseous result from rain,you know for a Christian this can be "both" if people would think open mindly.

 

If you are going to make scientific claims, you should consider learning the actual science before speaking about it.  Rainbows occur when light meets a different transparent medium (e.g., air to glass, water to air, plastic to diamond).  That light is reflected (so we can see it) and refracted at different angles based on the light's various frequencies.  This not only occurs with water, but with glass, plastic, diamonds and other transparent items.  This well understood and non-controversial explanation is supported by vast relevant and reliable empirical evidence.  This scientific explanation has nothing to do with a "multi colored gaseous result" (your words).

 

Science predicts that this phenomena has (in the past), can (in the present) and will (in the future) occur throughout the universe if the conditions are right.  Your particular religion claims (without any evidence) that this phenomena did not exist until after the Noachian Flood on Earth (another claim lacking in evidence), just several thousands of years ago (again, with no evidence).

 

I fail to see how anyone, including a Christian, can reconcile the obvious contradiction that:

 

1)  Physics predicts rainbows (or an equivalent) have occurred over billions of years throughout the know universe; and

 

2)  Christianity claims that rainbows (or an equivalent) did not occur anywhere in the know universe until after the Noachian Flood on the planet Earth.

 

How do you reconcile this contradiction?  

 

If you assert the Biblical claim is correct, please provide relevant and reliable empirical evidence to support your assertion.

[midniterider]

A rainbow is also a symbol of LGBT friendship and solidarity.

[midniterider]

2 hours ago, Joefizz said:

No in my original king james version it says repent in place of your version's "change his mind" either way same difference in both scriptures, he is not speaking on the question of "if he has lied" in Numbers it is speaking on "what reason did God have to lie about or repent from his actions or otherwise" concerning "Barak",context is important he said "should" indicating he was giving reasons that Barak's fate was sealed,because yes God repented and has repented multiple times,but he was making clear that he had no reason to neither change his mind concerning overtaking Barak nor to be dishonest with him concerning overtaking him.

God is not in numbers claiming that he has never lied,nor  been deceptive,nor never repented,he is only speaking on that his order was final despite Barak's pleading through Balaam.

 

Just confirming that 'repent' and 'change your mind' are the same thing, correct?

 

Repent/metanoeo: https://gracethrufaith.com/ask-a-bible-teacher/what-does-repent-mean/

 

God changing his mind some here: https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/God-Changing-His-Mind

[buffettphan]

5 hours ago, Joefizz said:

I respect the main reason for this site

 

6 hours ago, Joefizz said:

sure I believe hell and heaven must be taught and preached

 

 

Yeah, you show about the same amount of respect for us as an abuser shows when s/he crashes in on a domestic-abuse survivors support group. "Oh, honey, I just want to talk (about MY god and how great he is)...."

[knightcore]

19 hours ago, knightcore said:

also as other people have pointed out, again, there's no polite way to tell someone that you don't agree with them being gay. but you know what? go ahead and prove me wrong. tell me politely about how being gay is wrong and show me those polite verses to consider. you know the ones that don't condemn me, I'd like to see those honestly.

 

Boosted because I think you missed this @Joefizz  

[LogicalFallacy]

On 9/9/2017 at 10:06 AM, sdelsolray said:

The squeaker in this new chew toy is already broken and the stuffing is falling out.

The sad thing is I haven't even had a decent crack at the toy yet.

 

Ain't you ex-Christians heard of sharing and caring?  

[LogicalFallacy]

Below portion copied for tracking conversation: (We can no longer nest quote and its a pain!

 

 

Quote

 

  On 9/7/2017 at 3:44 PM, Joefizz said:

1) So what are you classifying as wrong doings (What you call sin)?

1a. Doing things with intent on doing some hurt to others or doing one's best to get a fight started,leeching off of others in order to be lazy and miserable,while having "no remorse" for one's actions,for example I could understand someone venting but when it goes on for about a whole hour or so without ceasing or making coherent sense,then I consider it a "wrong doing" and will speak up to the person doing this politely asking them to stop or if they persist authoratively I will firmly  tell them to stop or they can leave until they "calm down",or is a person persistently insultiinsulting me or others eventually I'll have them be aware of what they are doing and seek for them to stop and think,if they won't listen then they are welcome to leave.

 

2) What about people with mental disorders that prevent them from being able to distinguish right from wrong ? They are not aware of doing wrong so are they sinning?

1.continued:mental disorders is tough to determine because some are aware of what they do and continue to do wrong,and some aren't aware of what they do,with such cases,if an intent to hurt can be established then what they do is wrong if not,then I leave the matter between the individual and God.

 

And how do you classify what is wrong?

I classify what is wrong depending upon one's intent or mind set,for example at my birthday party in August,my Aunt I requested to come and cook ham as I usually do because it cheers her up and it's great to eat,but she was already upset about something that had nothing to do with me or anyone in the house,and so she attacked my other aunt with rantings and ravings as well as me,for no coherent reason but to use particularly my aunt as a person to gripe at for her problems,that I believe is wrong because it's starting a fight for no logical reason with the intent for hurt upon others.

 

I'm still not clear on how your definition of sin here relates to Adam and Eve's sin, and Lucifer's sin. Adam and Eve didn't have any intent to hurt, in fact the original translation of the word we call sin means "to miss the mark" - so the bible is saying Adam and Eve missed the mark, they didn't get what god was wanting. This is different from an act of rebellion or intent to hurt that you propose. In fact the bible indicates Adam and Eve were deceived - there was no ill intent. So I think there is a disconnect between what your definitions of sin are and what the bible portrays.

 

  On 9/7/2017 at 3:44 PM, Joefizz said:

Do you believe that God is all powerful and all knowing and all good?

2.Yes

 

If you do do agree with the above, is  it possible for Lucifer to act against an all powerful god without the all knowing god knowing what would happen, and without the all powerful gods permission for Lucifer to act?

3.lucifer has and had his own will,and God could foresee any of his angels turning against him,as to permission just like in a king's service with lucifer turning against God,he gave up being under God's command so he was no longer bound to ask permission of God for anything as he was when in his service.

 

 

3.1) So do you think it possible for Lucifer to act outside Gods will?

 

  On 9/7/2017 at 3:44 PM, Joefizz said:

Furthermore how did Lucifer come into being and how did Lucifer become aware of sin before there was sin?

4.I don't know how he came into being

 

 

4.1) You don't think God created Lucifer?

 

  On 9/7/2017 at 3:44 PM, Joefizz said:

but his actions speak for themselves,whether he classified his actions as sin or not he was certainly aware of the consequences of his actions,knowing he would be known as doing wrong if he didn't overtake God successfully after all just like a king whomever is in service to a figure of power will no doubt be told of what is right and wrong by the same figure of power or by those in his service,I said sin on earth in my previous post because lucifer had sinned before man came into being.

 

5) Are any of Lucifer's actions outside the will of God? (This is closely related to Q 3.1)

 

 

 

 

@Joefizz Continued conversation starts here

 

On 9/8/2017 at 10:00 PM, Joefizz said:

Before I clarify further let me first thank you for letting me know of the original translation of sin I think I may have heard this once before but I always appreciate effort and honesty,some even the realm of Christians think me odd for liking people's posts that have these qualities,I still can't like people's posts here strangely but still I "Like" your effort in seeking to better grasp an understanding of the bible,now back to clarifying...

 

 

Thank you, however let me point out (so there is no confusion) that I'm not attempting to understand the Bible. I did that for 33 years and have a reasonable grasp on what it contains. I am attempting to understand YOUR understanding of the bible, without which our conversation would be meaningless. I will also challenge your understanding of the bible when I think that I have more accurate information about it. For instance you mentioned the KJV - do your realize the beloved KJV is one of the worst translated versions as its based of poor original documents. And did you know that those "original documents" are copies of copies of copies fill of errors of the very first originals?

 

 

On 9/8/2017 at 10:00 PM, Joefizz said:

Particularly I'll clarify on 4. I do believe God created lucifer I was speaking on more of that I don't know anything regarding his creation by God because I'm unaware of any time that the bible speaks on if he is made from God or from some form of element so I can only speculate on the hows of him being made,I do know however that he was trusted by God and ranked as an ark angel in God's service,it's tough with a fare few things in the bible left hanging so to speak,for instance,the Book of Jonah kind of leaves me wondering what happened next to Jonah,did he leave God's service after finally warning Nineveh of their impending destruction,or did he decide to stay in service to God,So I can only presume such things as unnecessary to know,I suppose for the indication to have faith in the future instead of dwelling on the past,or perhaps God simply didn't see a reason for something's mention,like with Jonah,it's a very short part of the bible and holds moral value in teaching turning against whom one serves devoutly,is always met with consequences of some sort,yet it's still interesting to think on what could have happened next.

 

Right now that we know that you believe God created Lucifer please answer the following. 

 

1) Do you think it possible for Lucifer to act outside Gods will?

 

2) Are any of Lucifer's actions outside the will of God? (This is closely related to Q 3.1)

[♦ ficino ♦]

Long, but very relevant to this thread, on Christian leaders' scare tactics right now about the hurricanes, and on the kind of God their religion sells. 

 

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/rolltodisbelieve/2017/09/10/another-ploy-backfired-the-celestial-extortionist/

[bornagainathiest]

On 9/9/2017 at 10:53 PM, Joefizz said:

Yeah I understand what you mean BAA,despite my religion I don't discredit all science  many people  discredit science using simple scriptures,particularly out of context or using just one verse,science has had successes and helpful developments even concerning health,medicine,and other beneficial things,to just brush that off as "nothing" or "not true" is to be foolish,science has it's place too in the world,after all even God never said for anyone to be "helpless" or "not explore" or  to "not think for ourselves" I mean come on a whole planet and we aren't to explore it,use it's resources,or explore space,there is no scripture that disallows such things,so it's rather childish to not at least have respect for science or to not be civil when discussing coinciding subjects,for example a rainbow is known as an everlasting promise that God would never flood the entire earth again with intent on hurt,science calls a rainbow a form of multi colour gaseous result from rain,you know for a Christian this can be "both" if people would think open mindly.

 

Joe,

 

I'm bothered by your usage of the word "both".

In astronomy the diameter of the Moon is 2,160 miles.  That's what it's measured diameter is.  That measurement can be expressed in other units of distance, like inches, yards or feet.  Or you can use kilometers, meters and centimeters.  But whatever units are used they must add up to the equivalent of 2,160 miles.  The diameter of the Moon cannot be both 2,160 miles and something else.  It can't be 2,160 miles and 9,876 miles.  Both values cannot be true.  There is no both.  It's not possible for the Moon to have two different diameters at the same time.  That's impossible.  

 

So, if science and scripture were to disagree about something, then there is no room for both to be correct.

Open mindedness is an admirable thing when it comes to human nature, but it plays no role in science.   Precise values and measurements are the gold-standard of science, not open mindedness.  Nor are there metaphors, symbolic meanings, allegories or poetic interpretations.  In science something is exactly what it is measured and defined to be.  It is never metaphorically or symbolically equated with something else.   Two different things are never 'both' the same.

 

Therefore, if science and scripture disagree, there's no way both can be true, no matter how open minded you want to be about it.

 

I'm sorry, but you're wrong about using the word 'both'.

Yes, you can do it if you want to - but then you can't call the comparison you're making between science and scripture a properly scientific one.  It's now become something else.  If you take scientific data out of it's proper scientific context, then it ceases to be science and ceases to have any scientific value.  That's why 'both' can never true, when science and scripture disagree.

 

It's one or the other... never both.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

[bornagainathiest]

17 hours ago, Joefizz said:

No in my original king james version it says repent in place of your version's "change his mind" either way same difference in both scriptures, he is not speaking on the question of "if he has lied" in Numbers it is speaking on "what reason did God have to lie about or repent from his actions or otherwise" concerning "Barak",context is important he said "should" indicating he was giving reasons that Barak's fate was sealed,because yes God repented and has repented multiple times,but he was making clear that he had no reason to neither change his mind concerning overtaking Barak nor to be dishonest with him concerning overtaking him.

God is not in numbers claiming that he has never lied,nor  been deceptive,nor never repented,he is only speaking on that his order was final despite Barak's pleading through Balaam.

 

Ok Joe,

 

You don't see a need to reconcile, because in your view there is nothing to reconcile.

But I'm not persuaded by your argument.  That's because the KJV isn't the original Greek and Aramaic that the Bible was written in.  From the links the Midniterider has given it looks to me that when God repents He does change his mind.  Which would seem to contradict the Christian belief that God is all-wise and all-knowing.  Why would such a God change His mind about something when He already foreknows the outcome?   

 

Repent/metanoeo: https://gracethrufaith.com/ask-a-bible-teacher/what-does-repent-mean/

 

God changing his mind some here: https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/God-Changing-His-Mind

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

 

 

p.s.

This is an excellent example of the logic I used earlier.  When science and scripture disagree, both cannot be true.  Two contradictory things cannot both be true.  In the same way, it cannot be true that God never changes His mind, while also changing His mind.  One must be true and the other false.  Both cannot be true.

[Jeff]

"Original King James version"... lol

you crack me up

King james is pretty late to the party

Stop typing pages and read some Bart Ehrman @Joefizz  

You would love him. He went to school to become the best in his field so he could prove the bible to be true. 

[Astreja]

On 9/8/2017 at 10:46 PM, Joefizz said:

...while I get your meaning in the bible it states that a man and a woman whom are married have no power over their bodies but of each other...

 

...though I understand that the man is to be the authority over the household...

 

Two excellent reasons to reject the Bible.  I reserve the right to have 100% power over my own body and to not be subservient in my own home.

 

Suffice to say that I would never under any circumstances marry a partner who wanted to be the authority over me.

[God]

On 9/1/2017 at 6:07 PM, Joefizz said:

Well "Anything" can be taught wrong by being harassive or forceful,that's particular where brainwashing can occur not by simply teaching or preaching a subject without force.

 

Fyi, bro, harassment and forceful is kind of my forte. Hell is the ultimate "do it or else" kind of force, eh? 

[God]

On 9/9/2017 at 4:39 PM, midniterider said:

 

Salvation: A fake solution to a fake problem.

 

Only for those in my creation who aren't the brightest halos in paradise, if you're picking up what I'm throwin at ya. 

[ag_NO_stic]

On 9/8/2017 at 11:46 PM, Joefizz said:

That's not entirely accurate,while I get your meaning in the bible it states that a man and a woman whom are married have no power over their bodies but of each other,so both have the power to seek intimacy of a sexual nature of each other and aren't allowed to seek intimacy of a sexual nature from anyone else,so really by that basis they meet each other's sexual intimacy willingly not forcibly,though I understand that the man is to be the authority over the household,this isn't to be interpreted that he alone makes the decisions in sexual intimacy.

 

What planet are you from that you think a woman would want to "seek out intimacy" from her RAPIST?! You are taking new testament marriage and conflating it with Old Testament marriage. There is not much in the NT to suggest that men just selected women ripe for the raping like they did in the OT. That is pretty fucked up.

[midniterider]

Did Joe throw in the towel? At least God showed up finally. 

[God]

Just now, midniterider said:

Did Joe throw in the towel? At least God showed up finally. 

 

Those who rejected my sacrifice to myself are kinda low on my priority list, jafeel? No respect around here.

[God]

Just now, midniterider said:

Did Joe throw in the towel? At least God showed up finally. 

 

Also, for the record, he was keeping my sabbath day holy. It's a thing for them.

[midniterider]

4 minutes ago, God said:

 

Also, for the record, he was keeping my sabbath day holy. It's a thing for them.

 

Watching football, yes. My error, God.

 

 

[God]

1 minute ago, midniterider said:

 

Watching football, yes. My error, God.

 

 

 

Your error is understandable, you're just a human. But you know how I work with forgiveness, it's only freely given if you believe. Smh.

[Joefizz]

5 hours ago, midniterider said:

Did Joe throw in the towel? At least God showed up finally. 

No just been tired,had another double shift Saturday then didn't get much sleep,went to church,came home slept like a log,woke up at about 1:00 am next day,played warriors orochi until I felt groggy again,went to sleep got up at about 10 am had some breakfast,sorted out clothes for doing laundry went to sleep again(warm whether gets me feeling like doing nothing especially when rain is involved)finally at 3:pm I felt more awake to at least check back on this site,as expected alot of serious questions and responses and as always some humorous responses like yours midnite,this person as God of Israel,the great I am?

nope just another person with an old guy picture playing pretend,I am so surprised...

•