Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

The Lord's delayed return


DarkBishop

Recommended Posts

On 10/7/2021 at 11:08 PM, TheRedneckProfessor said:

god's lie doesn't stop there, either, @walterpthefirst; it goes much deeper.  In Genesis 3:22, god is trying to figure out what to do with Adam now that he had become like god, knowing good and evil.  god decides to banish Adam from The Garden, lest Adam also eat from the Tree of Life and live forever.

 

So, even after eating the fruit of knowledge, Adam was still immortal, so long as he had access to the Tree of Life.  Eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was never going to bring death to Adam and the omniscient god knew that.  It was banishment from The Garden, thereby denying access to the Tree of Life that brought death to Adam. 

 

So, god's claim that eating the fruit of knowledge would bring Adam's death was simply a bald-faced lie.  Not only because god knew he would not die that same day; but also because god knew the power of life and death depended on having access to the Tree of Life.  And god knew he would ultimately deny Adam access to it.

 

Moreover, it was not "sin" that brought death upon all of humanity, excepting your two buddies; rather, it was god's response to Adam's curiosity that killed us all.  god was never interested in a "perfect" creation; and this was never about "sin."  If it were about perfection versus sin, god would never have planted the Tree of Life in The Garden.  Instead, he deceived Adam into condemning himself and the rest of humanity with him.

 

god is not just a liar; he is a fucking liar.

 

Amen.

 

 

Btw Professor, I don't recall exactly where he said it, but somewhere BAA wrote something like...

 

'to discover the true meaning of god's warning about death, Adam had to disobey him and find out the hard way.'

 

If that isn't entrapment I don't know what is.

 

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Playing in the theists' sandbox (i.e., assuming all or certain parts of the Bible are true for discussion purposes) is often a tortuous and muddied path.  Sometimes it is much easier to simply call it poorly written fiction/mythology/literature, be done with it and read other things that are not poorly written.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, sdelsolray said:

Playing in the theists' sandbox (i.e., assuming all or certain parts of the Bible are true for discussion purposes) is often a tortuous and muddied path.  Sometimes it is much easier to simply call it poorly written fiction/mythology/literature, be done with it and read other things that are not poorly written.

 

Yes, its the easier route to do that, sdelsolray.

 

But quite often the people who come here in the process of deconversion cannot take the easier path of simply dismissing scripture in that way.

 

Too often the bible has played too important a role in their lives for them to just 'switch off' its influence over them.

 

It therefore falls to us to gently show them that this book does not even stand up on its own terms.

 

Doing that means getting into the sandbox and using the very assumptions that they have held to for many years.

 

To demonstrate that the bible contradicts itself, that god contradicts himself and that neither can be trusted.

 

Hence my input into this thread.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

Yes, there's a lot of playing in the theists sand box with this one. But the points still remain. The bible is full of bullshit, even by it's OWN standards....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I don't know who needs to hear this, but....Jesus isn't coming back. Cite all the verses you want. It isn't going to happen and it's a waste of energy to even give it thought.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Bedouin said:

I don't know who needs to hear this, but....Jesus isn't coming back. Cite all the verses you want. It isn't going to happen and it's a waste of energy to even give it thought.

 

Yep. Was the point of the post. Was gonna see what apologetics they could make up but no true believers took the bait. Oh well. Guess there is no excuse for Jesus's tardiness. That's not something I really considered while a Christian or even while I was on my way out. But its kinda just in your face when you think about it. 

 

2000 years is a long time ⌛

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

This is a very foolish post (I am speaking of DarkBishop's leading post). I say this because we all know the Universe is about 14.5 billion years old. We all know dinosaurs are millions of years old.

 

God CREATED time. I was watching NOVA and they describe the BIG BANG. I believe what the scientists teach. The Universe exploded from a pea sized (or even smaller) area of infinite mass, and expanded, and is still expanding into billions and billions of miles of space. Time began at that moment, and so did Space.

 

Think of that-- Atheist scientists are willing to believe that the Universe expanded from an area as big as a grain of sand or so (again, I accept it as truth) yet cannot believe there is a Being who put it into action. They are willing to believe an utterly fantastic hypothesis, but cannot believe in God. But as I said I believe that hypothesis to be true.

 

The foolishness in this lead post is that 2000 years is like two days to God. Peter even says "a day with the Lord is like a thousand years, and a thousand years as a day". 14.5 billion years ago God began to create the Universe, and we are WHINING because He hasn't returned for 2000 years? Give me a break.

 

2000 years is like a snap of the finger to God. To US it is a Long time, but to God it is NOTHING. Jesus will return. Just as surely as He came the First time He will come the Second time. The birth of Israel is the beginning of this return.

 

The first appearing of Jesus covered a span of 33 years. His second coming could span many years also-- maybe even 99 years (3 times the length of his first appearance) Who knows? Know one knows the day or hour.

 

Peter said there would be scoffers in the last days. The last days have spanned 2000 years, so there have ALWAYS been mockers. But mmockery. Mockers exist now as 2000 years have passed. But to Jesus only two days have passed-- he's barely been in Heaven for 2 days--and He is going to come back now.

 

The post is foolish because it is viewing time through OUR eyes, not God's eyes. "Behold, I am coming soon" says Jesus. 2000 years is SOON to a God who has seen our Universe grow for 14 billion years.

2000 years is NOTHING to Him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator
8 hours ago, Fish153 said:

Think of that-- Atheist scientists are willing to believe that the Universe expanded from an area as big as a grain of sand or so (again, I accept it as truth) yet cannot believe there is a Being who put it into action. They are willing to believe an utterly fantastic hypothesis, but cannot believe in God. But as I said I believe that hypothesis to be true.

This is not how science or hypotheses work.  No one believes a hypothesis.  A hypothesis is simply put forth based on an observation.  Said hypothesis is then tested as best as possible through repeated (and repeatable) experiments.  If the data generated and collected during the experimentation supports the hypothesis, then the hypothesis is tentatively accepted.  But if the data does not support the hypothesis, the hypothesis is rejected.  Or changed based on what the data does show.  It's a lot different than reaching a conclusion first and then digging for evidence to support it, while rejecting any evidence to the contrary.  But we don't know anybody around here who'd do such a thing, do we?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fish,

 

The claim by Christian apologists that god created the universe, as per Genesis 1 : 1, is thoroughly debunked in this thread.

 

 

I suggest you read it.

 

But, before you do that, please answer the question I put to you in your own thread.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Fish153

I'm not ignoring you on this thread but I'll have to reply later or maybe even tomorrow. Busy day today with family and such. Last minute shopping to do, a dinner, etc. You know how it is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should have known you would center on the hypothesis rather than the main point I am making. If you don't believe the "big bang" hypothesis fine. If you think the Universe came into existence through a different "process" fine. No problem.

 

The point I was making is TIME itself. What is 2000 years to GOD? Who KNOWS how the Universe came into existence? A big bang or some other way, it doesn't matter.

 

The point is-- if God exists-- and I definitely believe he does--2000 years is a "drop in the bucket".

 

Please don't continue with posts disputing the "hypothesis" about The BIG BANG because that was not the point of my post at all.

 

My point was that you are making much ado about it having been 2000 years and Christ has not returned. As I stated, 2000 years is like "2 days" to Him, or like the snap of a finger. From God's perspective 2000 years is "quick"--so when Jesus says "Behold I am coming soon" he could mean 2000 years or 5000 years. That is "quick" from God's perspective.  Jesus is returning very soon.

 

Geez-- it is SO hard to make a point on this board. Instead of centering on the topic of TIME you center one "part" of the post and want to start arguments about the big bang "hypothesis" and what a "hypothesis" is. That is not the POINT of my post at all. My post concerns TIME from God's perspective versus ours. Please stay on topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Walter--

I really don't care if someone supposedly "debunks" someone's theory on how the Universe was formed, or supposedly "debunks" the creation story in Genesis.

 

The point of my post is TIME itself when viewed by God, and viewed by man. We see 2000 years as A LONG time. To God 2000 years is like "2 days", or a drop in a bucket.

 

When WE hear "Behold I come quickly" we think of "right away" because we are viewing TIME through finite eyes. 2000 years seems TOO LONG to match those words. But we need to see that it is JESUS speaking these words, and when He says "Behold I come quickly" he is referring to HIS PERCEPTION OF TIME because He is God.

 

Please don't stray off into "creation story debunking" or some other such subjects. My post is about TIME, and DarkBishop's thought that "2000 years is a LOONG time"-- because to God it isn't at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

Fish, the two thousand years that have elapsed since we were assured that Jesus would return within a human lifetime may not seem like anything at all to a deity.  But those twenty centuries have seen daily suffering by creatures human and animal, and the birth of billions of humans who have failed to do what was needed to be saved.  All of which could have been brought to an end once and for all.  I guess time flies when you’re a deity having fun: observing pain and suffering that you could end with a snap of your fingers if you were so inclined.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Redneck-- read my two posts above. My point is actually about TIME itself, not arguing about "hypothesis". I used 14.5 billion years not to start a debate about  the beginning of the Universe, but to show that TIME to God is as nothing. 2000 years is like a weekend to Him, or shorter. To call 2000 years (from God's perspective) a LOONNG time is foolishness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TABA--

 

Peter says that God is not really delaying His return in the way some think, but that he is being extremely gracious, not wanting anyone to perish, but to come to repentance.

On the contrary, the 2000 years have allowed MILLIONS AND MILLIONS to be saved. I would not exist, and neither would you, if Jesus had not waited.

 

TABA-- have YOU had time to be saved? Has the offer been made to YOU? Yes, it has. God has extended His mercy to YOU. Don't worry about "what might have been"--accept the invitation that is being given to YOU right now. Atheists and deconverts are always accusing God of cruelty, etc, but the OFFER OF SALVATION has clearly been offered to THEM and they are refusing it. That is hard to understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator
46 minutes ago, Fish153 said:

Redneck-- read my two posts above. My point is actually about TIME itself, not arguing about "hypothesis". I used 14.5 billion years not to start a debate about  the beginning of the Universe, but to show that TIME to God is as nothing. 2000 years is like a weekend to Him, or shorter. To call 2000 years (from God's perspective) a LOONNG time is foolishness.

I understood your assertion,  which for whatever reason you call a "point".  But not even understanding basic principles of science, such as how a hypothesis works, renders the rest of your intellectual-mimicry laughable.  This is why I felt the need to correct you.  Re-read my post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Redneck---

 

OK thanks for the correction. I need to be very careful how I word things here. I should have begun the post:

 

"Most scientists assert that the Universe is appx. 14.5 billion years old. That is a LONG time. DarkBishop states 2000 years is a LONG time. If God created the Universe (as I believe, and the Bible states) then 2000 years is a "drop in the bucket" to God".

 

I would go on to point out that from God's point of view 2000 years is a "quick" amount of time to pass before He comes back. To US 2000 years has been way too long to wait-- but to God it is NOTHING. If "a thousand years is like one day to the Lord" Jesus has only been in Heaven for 2 DAYS!  From His perspective 2000 years is over very quickly.

 

This was the basis of my "assertion", not to stray off into subjects such as debunking creation theories, etc.  I was merely considering TIME ITSELF when viewed by man, and when viewed by God.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fish153 said:

This was the basis of my "assertion", not to stray off into subjects such as debunking creation theories, etc.  I was merely considering TIME ITSELF when viewed by man, and when viewed by God.

 

Other than your personal experience of God, what can you use to show us God, and then God's view of time?

 

You keep quoting the Bible, but have yet to provide any evidence of the Bible's reliability.  At this point you are no different than a Muslim or Hindu quoting their own scriptures without first showing us the reliability and veracity of those scriptures.

 

Other than God choosing you (and clearly not choosing us) what evidence do you have for your assertions? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Knowb---

There are scholars who believe the Bible to be "stories". There are others who find the Bible to be historically accurate. No-- I cannot PROVE the Bible is the Word of God. The term "scholars say..." can cover a very wide spectrum. It does come down to what we ACCEPT to be true. And I believe God has left it that way on purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Krowb--

And how can you say God has chosen me and not you? What if he has chosen us both but one of us is REFUSING his offer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then he needs to step up game and let me know if he is Mormon God, your God, Catholic God, Allah, Shiva, etc....

 

So far he hasn't personally sought me out in the same he has sought you and hasn't seen fit to disclose himself in a way that can be agreed upon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fish153 said:

Redneck---

 

OK thanks for the correction. I need to be very careful how I word things here. I should have begun the post:...

 

 

 

You are being dramatic, whining really.

 

You should consider being more careful about presenting attitudes and feeling as fact, manipulating language to do so.

Otherwise, you bear the risk of being called-out on it.. as do we all.

 

That was the point being made to you in the previous discussion.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Fish153 said:

Krowb--

And how can you say God has chosen me and not you? What if he has chosen us both but one of us is REFUSING his offer?

 

Also, by your previous testimony it is obvious your concept of God has not sought me.  Your God knows all things, he knows exactly what is needed to bring you to him and keep you to him.  He prevents you from leaving him (in your view of course).

 

He ought to know exactly what I need to believe as well and from your description, the only possible reason to present you with sufficient evidence and not myself is by his conscious choice.

 

Omniscience has consequences.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Fish153 said:

I should have known you would center on the hypothesis rather than the main point I am making. If you don't believe the "big bang" hypothesis fine. If you think the Universe came into existence through a different "process" fine. No problem.

 

The point I was making is TIME itself. What is 2000 years to GOD? Who KNOWS how the Universe came into existence? A big bang or some other way, it doesn't matter.

 

The point is-- if God exists-- and I definitely believe he does--2000 years is a "drop in the bucket".

 

Please don't continue with posts disputing the "hypothesis" about The BIG BANG because that was not the point of my post at all.

 

My point was that you are making much ado about it having been 2000 years and Christ has not returned. As I stated, 2000 years is like "2 days" to Him, or like the snap of a finger. From God's perspective 2000 years is "quick"--so when Jesus says "Behold I am coming soon" he could mean 2000 years or 5000 years. That is "quick" from God's perspective.  Jesus is returning very soon.

 

Geez-- it is SO hard to make a point on this board. Instead of centering on the topic of TIME you center one "part" of the post and want to start arguments about the big bang "hypothesis" and what a "hypothesis" is. That is not the POINT of my post at all. My post concerns TIME from God's perspective versus ours. Please stay on topic.

 

If your post was about time Fish, then it falls to you to provide objective evidence that god created time.

 

Your faith-based assertions cut no ice here.

 

Objective evidence, please.

 

Walter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Fish153 said:

Walter--

I really don't care if someone supposedly "debunks" someone's theory on how the Universe was formed, or supposedly "debunks" the creation story in Genesis.

 

The point of my post is TIME itself when viewed by God, and viewed by man. We see 2000 years as A LONG time. To God 2000 years is like "2 days", or a drop in a bucket.

 

When WE hear "Behold I come quickly" we think of "right away" because we are viewing TIME through finite eyes. 2000 years seems TOO LONG to match those words. But we need to see that it is JESUS speaking these words, and when He says "Behold I come quickly" he is referring to HIS PERCEPTION OF TIME because He is God.

 

Please don't stray off into "creation story debunking" or some other such subjects. My post is about TIME, and DarkBishop's thought that "2000 years is a LOONG time"-- because to God it isn't at all.

 

Once again Fish, please present objective evidence that god created time.

 

Walter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.