Suffering for the Good of the World

[walterpthefirst]

It was always god's will to overthrow his own creation and nothing that Adam, Eve or the serpent did changed his mind.

 

Do you agree?

[walterpthefirst]

God violated our free will by binding us all to disobedience and him giving us Mosaic Law doesn't change that.

 

Do you agree?

[walterpthefirst]

When it comes to who is ultimately responsible for all suffering the buck stops with god and not with anyone or anything he used to achieve his will.

 

Do you agree?

[Edgarcito]

I truthfully don’t know the answers to those questions Walter.  Maybe clarity will come my way one day.  I will concede that it’s all below God, but uncertain how objective and subjective work in our lives to some end. Thx.

[walterpthefirst]

3 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

I truthfully don’t know the answers to those questions Walter.  Maybe clarity will come my way one day.  I will concede that it’s all below God, but uncertain how objective and subjective work in our lives to some end. Thx.

 

I agree that you do not know the answers, Edgarcito.

 

But perhaps you've forgotten that what we are doing here is applying logic to scripture?

 

And yesterday I did say that I wasn't interested in your personal interpretations.

 

So I'm not asking you what you think or believe, I'm asking you what the logic of the scripture says.

 

A very different thing from your knowledge, your beliefs or your personal interpretations.

 

Therefore, I'll reword my questions so that you understand that I'm after the logic of scripture.

[walterpthefirst]

According to the logic of scripture, was it always god's will to overthrow his own creation and nothing that Adam, Eve or the serpent did changed his mind.

 

Do you agree?

[walterpthefirst]

According to the logic of scripture, god violated our free will by binding us all to disobedience and him giving us Mosaic Law doesn't change that.

 

Do you agree?

[walterpthefirst]

According to the logic of scripture, when it comes to who is ultimately responsible for all suffering the buck stops with god and not with anyone or anything he used to achieve his will.

 

Do you agree?

[Edgarcito]

My logical assessment of the story doesn’t take me very much past creation.  It logical to me that God had some reason to impose subjection.  I don’t understand the logic behind needing to impose the subjection nor the nature of the subjection.  In other words, if I knew why the necessity to remove them from Eden and deny eternal life, it might become more logical.  Or if we knew the logic behind the specific punishments.  So no, not much past creation.

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

3 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

I'm going to remain faithful that suffering is a necessity.

Perhaps the pedophile rapist genuinely believes that the rape is necessary so that the cuddling afterwards can happen.  I imagine the 10-year-old sex slave, upon whom the suffering is inflicted, probably feels differently. 

 

And maybe your god really thought that he needed to subject us all to suffering so that we would want to spend eternity with him.  But he would be just as deluded, sick, and evil as the rapist, wouldn't he?

[Edgarcito]

1 minute ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Perhaps the pedophile rapist genuinely believes that the rape is necessary so that the cuddling afterwards can happen.  I imagine the 10-year-old sex slave, upon whom the suffering is inflicted, probably feels differently. 

 

And maybe your god really thought that he needed to subject us all to suffering so that we would want to spend eternity with him.  But he would be just as deluded, sick, and evil as the rapist, wouldn't he?

Did you have a relationship w a Catholic priest you want to talk about J?

[walterpthefirst]

5 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

My logical assessment of the story doesn’t take me very much past creation.  It logical to me that God had some reason to impose subjection.  I don’t understand the logic behind needing to impose the subjection nor the nature of the subjection.  In other words, if I knew why the necessity to remove them from Eden and deny eternal life, it might become more logical.  Or if we knew the logic behind the specific punishments.  So no, not much past creation.

 

 

Once again Edgarcito, I'm not asking you about your understanding of creation, subjection and punishment.

 

Please look at my three questions and say if you agree or disagree on the basis of the logic of what scripture says.

 

So, if scripture says that it was always god's will to overthrown his own creation, do you agree or disagree?

 

If scripture says that god violated our free will by binding us all to disobedience, do you agree or disagree that Mosaic Law does not change that?

 

If scripture says that god is ultimately responsible for all suffering and the buck stops with him and nobody else, do you agree or disagree with that?

 

That's all you have to do.

 

Agree or disagree three times.

 

So, please go ahead and agree or disagree with my three questions.

 

 

Thank you.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

14 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Did you have a relationship w a Catholic priest you want to talk about J?

Rather than trying to understand the seriousness of the comparison, your response is to make inappropriate jokes.  What a complete ass.

[Edgarcito]

7 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

Once again Edgarcito, I'm not asking you about your understanding of creation, subjection and punishment.

 

Please look at my three questions and say if you agree or disagree on the basis of the logic of what scripture says.

 

So, if scripture says that it was always god's will to overthrown his own creation, do you agree or disagree?

 

If scripture says that god violated our free will by binding us all to disobedience, do you agree or disagree that Mosaic Law does not change that?

 

If scripture says that god is ultimately responsible for all suffering and the buck stops with him and nobody else, do you agree or disagree with that?

 

That's all you have to do.

 

Agree or disagree three times.

 

So, please go ahead and agree or disagree with my three questions.

 

 

Thank you.

We are having a disconnect Walter.  I can’t impose logic on statements that I have no clue how their validity or invalidity fit into a picture.  Really.  

[Edgarcito]

Maybe you are asking if I agree they are accurate statements in the logic of the story?  If that’s it, no, I can’t assess whether they are completely accurate to use.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

5 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

We are having a disconnect Walter.  I can’t impose logic on statements that I have no clue how their validity or invalidity fit into a picture.  Really.  

And yet, you have done exactly that, already:

 

36 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

It logical to me that God had some reason to impose subjection.  I don’t understand the logic behind needing to impose the subjection nor the nature of the subjection.  

You impose logic upon the idea that god must have had a reason to subject creation to suffering; but claim to have no clue about the validity or invalidity of the need to impose, nor the nature of the subjection.

 

So, when you claim not to be able to do something that you literally just did an hour ago, are you intentionally lying to avoid Walt's questions?

[walterpthefirst]

15 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

We are having a disconnect Walter.  I can’t impose logic on statements that I have no clue how their validity or invalidity fit into a picture.  Really.  

 

So if scripture said that Jesus was in Jerusalem on a given day, you couldn't use logic to work out that he therefore couldn't have been in Damascus on that day?

 

Yes, you could.  You use logic all the time in your everyday life.  Now start applying it to scripture.

 

 

 

Anyway, I'm not asking you to impose logic on scripture, I'm asking you to look at the logic that is already there in it.

 

Two different things.

 

 

So, if scripture says that it was always god's will to overthrow his own creation all you have to do is agree or disagree with that.

 

Do you agree or disagree?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Edgarcito]

7 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

And yet, you have done exactly that, already:

 

You impose logic upon the idea that god must have had a reason to subject creation to suffering; but claim to have no clue about the validity or invalidity of the need to impose, nor the nature of the subjection.

 

So, when you claim not to be able to do something that you literally just did an hour ago, are you intentionally lying to avoid Walt's questions?

Would you just butt out already..  gheeze John.  Walter and I are working this out… honestly… despite your assessment of me.  Do you see me here trying to communicate?  You yourself made the call that I don’t know much about logic and here it is on display and you’re having a fit.  Take a breather…

[Edgarcito]

9 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

So if scripture said that Jesus was in Jerusalem on a given day, you couldn't use logic to work out that he therefore couldn't have been in Damascus on that day?

 

Yes, you could.  You use logic all the time in your everyday life.  Now start applying it to scripture.

 

 

 

Anyway, I'm not asking you to impose logic on scripture, I'm asking you to look at the logic that is already there in it.

 

Two different things.

 

 

So, if scripture says that it was always god's will to overthrow his own creation all you have to do is agree or disagree with that.

 

Do you agree or disagree?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don’t agree based on my uncertainty of “always”. 

[walterpthefirst]

1 minute ago, Edgarcito said:

I don’t agree based on my uncertainty of “always”. 

 

But how can you be uncertain of god's eternal, timeless and unchanging nature when I've shown you passages from scripture that say exactly that - that god IS eternal, IS timeless and DOES NOT change?

 

Here's the logic now.  If scripture says that god does not change, then where scripture also says that it was his will to overthrow his creation that must have always been his intention.

 

Do you see the logic?  If god can can change his mind, then scripture is lying.  So, if scripture is telling the truth, then god cannot change his mind.  

 

Therefore, it was always his will to overthrow his creation by subjecting it to frustration.

 

What happens within time does not and cannot change the eternal and changeless nature of god.

 

There is no uncertainty here and you should have no uncertainty about this either - because it is written in the bible.

 

Do you see the logic here?  

 

 

[walterpthefirst]

Now, it's approaching 2 a.m. here Edgarcito, so I'm going to go with your suggestion and take a breather from this.

 

Let us resume some time tomorrow, ok?

 

 

Bye for now.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

20 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Would you just butt out already..  gheeze John.  Walter and I are working this out… honestly… despite your assessment of me.  Do you see me here trying to communicate?  You yourself made the call that I don’t know much about logic and here it is on display and you’re having a fit.  Take a breather…

Fair enough.

[mwc]

15 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

Where does it get the knowledge?

     You're going to have to be more specific.

 

          mwc

 

[midniterider]

5 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

So if scripture said that Jesus was in Jerusalem on a given day, you couldn't use logic to work out that he therefore couldn't have been in Damascus on that day?

 

 

I thought God was everywhere all at once.

[walterpthefirst]

1 hour ago, midniterider said:

 

I thought God was everywhere all at once.

 

midniterider,

 

According to the orthodox Christian view of the trinity, when god incarnated himself as a human he was just as limited in his movements through space and time as we are.

 

However, during this period God the Father and God the Holy Spirit were, as they have always been, everywhere, all at once.

 

But, for the thirty-something years of his life as a human Jesus was not everywhere, all at once.

 

I was inviting Edgarcito to use his logic to understand that when scripture says that Jesus was in Jerusalem on a given day, he could therefore could not have been in Damascus, a city that was well over a day's journey away.

 

Hopefully, from this exercise Edgarcito will see and understand that he can use logic to understand scripture.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.