Searching for GOD...

[Sassy]

Not an answer to my question but given the author then that is not a surprise

The truth is the question you asked was already answered in the original quote and for the original reason.

The contention between believer and non-believer is not the believer but Satan keeping the non-believer where he wants them.
You have to fight for your beliefs against flesh but the believers has no fight against flesh. There battle is not against flesh and blood. It is the very forces which keep you in your unbelief. Flesh and blood are not the enemy..

You took part of an answer and when it was given to you.

Quote from: Sassy on October 13, 2016, 10:48:24 AM
Adam handed you over to Satan and you simply choose to remain there by rejecting the option out choice Jesus Christ.

Not an answer to my question but given the author then that is not a surprise

So original question taken out of the context it was originally written.

Sebastian Toe
Hero Member
*****
 
Posts: 4263
View Profile  Personal Message (Offline)

Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #13658 on: October 13, 2016, 08:52:56 AM »
Quote
Quote from: Sassy on October 13, 2016, 08:19:17 AM


............Satan keeping the non-believer where he wants them.

What does he do exactly in order to do that?

Adam handed you over to Satan and you simply choose to remain there by rejecting the option out choice Jesus Christ.

If you don't know the bible and Christianity what answer did you expect?

Truth is you cannot recognise an answer because you don't know the subject you ask about.

[Sassy]

So much froth, and no substance.  If you deem it silly to engage with other people of different viewpoint then why post on a messageboard whose remit is exactly to facilitate that. We get nowhere just flinging mud from a safe distance.

You are all bad at winding - up, but even that is so obvious and lacking any originality.
Sad you resort to such things when trying to cover your own ignorance.

[floo]

Your posts could be considered a wind up Sass, especially when your accuse other posters of being ignorant. Your comments don't give the impression you have a clue what you are on about!

[Khatru]

The Biblical god seems to get off on human misery!

Absolutely!  Killing is often his first response.

[Khatru]

You seem to have a very good knowledge of the bible, but you show an extremely negative bias in the way you interpret it.  I also have good knowledge of the bible, and in it I see a God who loves us.  The nature of God's love for us was summed up very well by the new recipient of the Nobel prize for literature:

When the rain is blowing in your face
And the whole world is on your case
I could offer a warm embrace
To make you feel my love

When evening shadows and the stars appear
And there is no one there to dry your tears
I could hold you for a million years
To make you feel my love

I know you haven't made your mind up yet
But I would never do you wrong
I've known it from the moment that we met
No doubt in my mind where you belong

I'd go hungry, I'd go black and blue
I'd go crawling down the avenue
And oh, there's nothing that I wouldn't do
To make you feel my love

The storms are raging on the rolling sea
And on the highway of regret
The winds of change are blowing wild and free
You ain't seen nothing like me yet

I could make you happy, make your dreams come true
Nothing that I wouldn't do
Go to the ends of the earth for you
To make you feel my love

There is definitely some good stuff in the Bible, particularly in Ecclesiastes.  I'm quite happy to admit to that fact with no problem whatsoever.

However, there is also some bad stuff in the Bible which I'm also happy to admit to.

Here is where we differ because what I see as bad (genocide, incest, murder, homophobia, misogyny, discrimination, divisiveness, slavery, etc) you see as the transcendent love of some supreme cosmic mega-being.

[Sebastian Toe]

The truth is the question you asked was already answered in the original quote and for the original reason.
You took part of an answer and when it was given to you.
So original question taken out of the context it was originally written.What does he do exactly in order to do that?



If you don't know the bible and Christianity what answer did you expect?

Truth is you cannot recognise an answer because you don't know the subject you ask about.

Nope. Still doesn't answer my question but if you are too blind or stupid to recognise that then I will leave you to your own little universe of reality.

[floo]

There is definitely some good stuff in the Bible, particularly in Ecclesiastes.  I'm quite happy to admit to that fact with no problem whatsoever.

However, there is also some bad stuff in the Bible which I'm also happy to admit to.

Here is where we differ because what I see as bad (genocide, incest, murder, homophobia, misogyny, discrimination, divisiveness, slavery, etc) you see as the transcendent love of some supreme cosmic mega-being.

As a human production, as I believe the documents making up the bible to be, some parts of it are wise and sensible, others unpleasant and/or less than credible.

[Alan Burns]

There is definitely some good stuff in the Bible, particularly in Ecclesiastes.  I'm quite happy to admit to that fact with no problem whatsoever.

However, there is also some bad stuff in the Bible which I'm also happy to admit to.

Here is where we differ because what I see as bad (genocide, incest, murder, homophobia, misogyny, discrimination, divisiveness, slavery, etc) you see as the transcendent love of some supreme cosmic mega-being.

You do not mention the New Testament.

There is certainly plenty of scope to pick fault with bits of the Old Testament.  But the irony is that it is the life changing values brought in by the New Testament which you use to judge the old testament. 

[Dicky Underpants]

You do not mention the New Testament.

There is certainly plenty of scope to pick fault with bits of the Old Testament.  But the irony is that it is the life changing values brought in by the New Testament which you use to judge the old testament.

The whole lot is a mixture. I can find things in the NT which are far worse than the Old. Conversely, I can find things in the Pentateuch which are abhorrent in the extreme, mixed in with the most humanitarian values. Even  Leviticus, the most boring book of the whole lot, has a fine chapter which the NT values hardly improve upon. But I'm not going to make any apologies for the story of Noah, or Numbers 31, or just about the whole of Joshua.
The Elisha and the bears story is to say the least - unedifying.

[floo]

The whole lot is a mixture. I can find things in the NT which are far worse than the Old. Conversely, I can find things in the Pentateuch which are abhorrent in the extreme, mixed in with the most humanitarian values. Even  Leviticus, the most boring book of the whole lot, has a fine chapter which the NT values hardly improve upon. But I'm not going to make any apologies for the story of Noah, or Numbers 31, or just about the whole of Joshua.
The Elisha and the bears story is to say the least - unedifying.

I agree, some of the stories in the NT are no better, or worse, than those in the OT.

[Alan Burns]

The whole lot is a mixture. I can find things in the NT which are far worse than the Old. Conversely, I can find things in the Pentateuch which are abhorrent in the extreme, mixed in with the most humanitarian values. Even  Leviticus, the most boring book of the whole lot, has a fine chapter which the NT values hardly improve upon. But I'm not going to make any apologies for the story of Noah, or Numbers 31, or just about the whole of Joshua.
The Elisha and the bears story is to say the least - unedifying.

You seem to be blind to the amazing impact the New Testament message has had on the civilisations which adopted Christianity.  The whole of western civilisation has been built upon the values set out in the NT.  The impact of this amazing turn round in human values is still reverberating around the world.  On the evolutionary time scale, Christianity is still in its infancy and we have yet to see the fruits of nations adopting the full message of the NT instead of trying to cherry pick the bits we like.

[torridon]

You seem to be blind to the amazing impact the New Testament message has had on the civilisations which adopted Christianity.  The whole of western civilisation has been built upon the values set out in the NT.  The impact of this amazing turn round in human values is still reverberating around the world.  On the evolutionary time scale, Christianity is still in its infancy and we have yet to see the fruits of nations adopting the full message of the NT instead of trying to cherry pick the bits we like.

I think that rather sidesteps Dicky's point which was about content, your response being about impact. Impact is a more complex issue, requiring us to factor in two thousand years of changing geopolitical cultural landscapes through which these ancient writings have come down. Any number of events in history could have altered their impact for better or worse

[Alan Burns]

I think that rather sidesteps Dicky's point which was about content, your response being about impact. Impact is a more complex issue, requiring us to factor in two thousand years of changing geopolitical cultural landscapes through which these ancient writings have come down. Any number of events in history could have altered their impact for better or worse

But do you honestly think our world would have been better without the impact of the NT?

[Gordon]

You seem to be blind to the amazing impact the New Testament message has had on the civilisations which adopted Christianity.  The whole of western civilisation has been built upon the values set out in the NT.  The impact of this amazing turn round in human values is still reverberating around the world.  On the evolutionary time scale, Christianity is still in its infancy and we have yet to see the fruits of nations adopting the full message of the NT instead of trying to cherry pick the bits we like.

You seem to be by-passing pre-Christian philosophy, Alan, which in addition to its own merits (think Aristotle and ethics) might be said to have influenced the bits of Christianity you are so enthusiastically proclaiming. You are also, as Torridon notes, avoiding the issues surrounding the use of Christianity in political terms over a number of centuries, although thankfully here in the UK those days have gone.

[Gordon]

But do you honestly think our world would have been better without the impact of the NT?

An impossible question to answer, since 'better' is subjective, and I suspect you are exaggerating the value of the NT: there are other approaches to the likes of morality you know.

[Alan Burns]

You seem to be by-passing pre-Christian philosophy, Alan, which in addition to its own merits (think Aristotle and ethics) might be said to have influenced the bits of Christianity you are so enthusiastically proclaiming. You are also, as Torridon notes, avoiding the issues surrounding the use of Christianity in political terms over a number of centuries, although thankfully here in the UK those days have gone.

It is certainly true that people, both from inside and outside the church, have tried to use Christianity to achieve their own self centred aims.  But this totally contradicts the main message of Christianity which is not to dominate, not to pursue power, not to conquer, but to serve God and to serve other people.

[floo]

I don't think the NT has done the world any favours, especially that crazy book of Revelation, which the 'end timers' interpret in the most 'creative' of ways.

[Gordon]

It is certainly true that people, both from inside and outside the church, have tried to use Christianity to achieve their own self centred aims.  But this totally contradicts the main message of Christianity which is not to dominate, not to pursue power, not to conquer, but to serve God and to serve other people.

You seem to have missed my point regarding the likes of Aristotle, whose influence as a philosopher isn't eclipsed by anything in the NT, and then of course there are all the other intellects who have explored morality, ethics and the 'good life'. I'm not saying the NT doesn't have some well-intended sentiment, but in my view it pales in comparison with the likes of Aristotle, Hume et al.

[torridon]

But do you honestly think our world would have been better without the impact of the NT?

That's hard to say, as a Jewish reformer Jesus altered the moral and social landscape much for the better, but then for much of its history the church has been an instrument of oppression, certainly until The Reformation, eliminating rival ways of thinking.  Who knows where we would be now without that particular trajectory; after all Jesus was not the only reformer. Buddha was teaching similar principles with the Golden Rule long before Jesus.

[floo]

As I have said before, I wonder if anything quoted in the NT attributed to Jesus was actually said by him or correctly quoted? As in the game of Chinese whispers, a phrase spoken at the end of the line is often vastly different to how it started out. How much more so when quoted by the much heralded 'eye witnesses' years into the future after he was dead.

[Sebastian Toe]

...... the main message of Christianity which is not to dominate, not to pursue power, not to conquer, but to serve God and to serve other people.

Have you looked at the history of the Roman Catholic church at all? 

[Khatru]

You do not mention the New Testament.

There is certainly plenty of scope to pick fault with bits of the Old Testament.  But the irony is that it is the life changing values brought in by the New Testament which you use to judge the old testament.

Not at all, Alan.

You may get your moral values from the New Testament but I'm not impressed when that very same morality has you defending genocide, infanticide, killing homosexuals, as well as those who exercised religious freedom.

I guess that's what comes when you base your whole moral system on an unproveable supernatural being. 

You'll excuse my preference for the foundation of good solid non-belief for building my ethics.  My morals can be based on verifiable common interests, known causes and known consequences.

Finally, what's so good about the New Testament when your god is going to come down and slaughter humanity anyway?

[Khatru]

You seem to be blind to the amazing impact the New Testament message has had on the civilisations which adopted Christianity.  The whole of western civilisation has been built upon the values set out in the NT.  The impact of this amazing turn round in human values is still reverberating around the world.  On the evolutionary time scale, Christianity is still in its infancy and we have yet to see the fruits of nations adopting the full message of the NT instead of trying to cherry pick the bits we like.

I'd put that down to the quality of Christian violence rather than the quality of the Christian message.

Let's not forget that until about 1400 CE, Christianity held Europe in a cesspit of piety.  While Non-Christian societies like the Chinese and Muslims flourished.

[BeRational]

Also if you just do what your god says is correct, that is not moral.

You have no moral values if you just do as you are told.

You need to evaluate for yourself to have a morality

[Brownie]

I agree with you BeR, for some people it isn't so much about what God says but what the Church says;  I have no wish to be disrespectful to anyone who adheres to a church creed because they are often worthy people but my belief is that every value has to be assessed independently.  If we don't do that we are stuck in a box.  Apart from the moral/ethical aspect, we miss out on so much because there is a wealth in the world to be seen, read, talked about and sometimes experienced.