The Meaning Of The Bible

[Dicky Underpants]

If you bothered to read the Holy Bible you will know, like Paul, as did Peter and John that Jesus, whilst earning the status of Almighty God and was made higher than the angels, Jesus himself, wouldn't put himself in competition with God. This suggests two beings, each bearing witness of the other, which is also what we are told. Jesus died to be resurrected and show us the mechanics behind resurrection and rebirth. He died to give us a new chance in life so that we can repair from the crumbling state of our genetic health, and he died so that we could talk to Almighty God in our prayers because before Jesus spoke to God on our behalf Almighty God wouldn't associate with sinners in any way, shape, or form...so we have a lot to be grateful for...especially as we all now know, if we care to examine the truth, that we each have an indestructible spirit which benefits our current existence, our future existence...and when we get the science right...our eternal existence.

You may frown on talking to God, but science, the catholics, the psychiatrists, and the Samaritans, have all found that it is good to talk. Now...I wonder how you will twist that against me.

My last remarks regarding the Trinity were directed specifically to Vlad, who is a Trinitarian. I know perfectly well that you are not. I also know very well how you both justify your views  using the Bible.
Since I am not a believer of any kind, I will leave it to you to continue your battles with the Trinitarians, since you seem to think the matter important. I don't.

[ippy]

The reason for your last comment is Dawkinism...It is the standard attack upon anyone who supports the Holy Bible.

The answer to your second comment is that millions over the generations have found huge comfort from the teaching of Jesus Christ...especially in war zones and other stressful times...and that is proof positive that a science is at work.

With reference to your first question it is the simple fact that one man saw it worthy of extreme pain and suffering to show the more caring and compassionate amongst us that there is hope at the end of the tunnel...and that the reason the world is  in the state it is in is because people with no real caring for humanity pretend that they do have whilst they undermine and try to destroy it.

It might sound a bit harsh but you wanted me to be brief.

I know being brief is very difficult for you Nick, now referring to your last paragraph, again preferably without the sermon, evidence? 

There is no evidence for any of the magical, mystical or superstition based parts of your manual and the evidence for the rest of it is a long way from anyone being able to substantiate much if any of the rest of this manual of yours.

So Nick unless you have some channel that's unknown to the rest of humanity, this would be including people that still believe in spite of the lack of evidence they have, how can you or anyone else legitimately claim the knowledge you say you have?

Don't forget Nick, NO SERMON WANTED OR NEEDED, some form of sensible answer will do very nicely thank you.

ippy.   

[NicholasMarks]

I know being brief is very difficult for you Nick, now referring to your last paragraph, again preferably without the sermon, evidence? 

There is no evidence for any of the magical, mystical or superstition based parts of your manual and the evidence for the rest of it is a long way from anyone being able to substantiate much if any of the rest of this manual of yours.

So Nick unless you have some channel that's unknown to the rest of humanity, this would be including people that still believe in spite of the lack of evidence they have, how can you or anyone else legitimately claim the knowledge you say you have?

Don't forget Nick, NO SERMON WANTED OR NEEDED, some form of sensible answer will do very nicely thank you.

ippy.   

Your wilful desire not to accept anything referring to the Holy Bible is not only scientific neglect but it is also down right foolishness. Almighty God said that He created the universe and, as you might guess, He has massaged this knowledge into His Word so that all those who obey Him can have access to that science and especially the Gospels where Jesus showed us what happens to our spirit in death. If we were righteous we could be resurrected but because we are not we must settle for rebirth and there are many examples of rebirth on YouTube...but, if we are ignorant of this truth, or refuse to acknowledge the purpose of Jesus Christ's great sacrifice, we will be just left swirling around the ether until it is emptied into the fiery lake of sulphur...coming soon.

 

[jeremyp]

Genesis 2:16-17
And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, 'Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die."

That's not warning them against evil, it's warning them against eating from a particular tree.

Or put it this way. If I change the bolding in your quotation.

Genesis 2:16-17
And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, 'Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die."

Is God warning Adam and Eve against good? A yes or no answer will suffice.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

That's not warning them against evil, it's warning them against eating from a particular tree.

Or put it this way. If I change the bolding in your quotation.

Is God warning Adam and Eve against good? A yes or no answer will suffice.

It's Garden metaphor.
He's warning them against the consequences of knowing both Good and evil.

[jeremyp]

It's Garden metaphor.
He's warning them against the consequences of knowing both Good and evil.

That's not the same as warning them against evil. Thinking about it, there's no point in warning them about evil if they do not know what evil is.

Similarly, there's no point in threatening them with death if they don't know what death is. So I wonder why he did it.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

That's not the same as warning them against evil. Thinking about it, there's no point in warning them about evil if they do not know what evil is.

Similarly, there's no point in threatening them with death if they don't know what death is. So I wonder why he did it.

They broke faith and relationship with God, Began to take more store of lesser sources than God. They had intimate knowledge of God.

Yet you are saying that you are sinless but you know evil and know what death is without being dead. I have never tried inhaling solvent because I trust those who tell me they can be instantaneously deadly. If I ignore the warnings.

I think the trouble is you are stretching the metaphors but it is said of atheists that they share the same biblical literalism as er, Biblical literalists.

[jeremyp]

They broke faith and relationship with God, Began to take more store of lesser sources than God.

1. Nobody told them that it was wrong to do that. As I said before: it would have been helpful if God had warned Adam and Eve not to trust the Serpent.

2. The Serpent turned out to be right.

They had intimate knowledge of God.

What's that supposed to mean? Were they sexually abusing him?

Yet you are saying that you are sinless but you know evil and know what death is without being dead.

I know what death is because it is a fact of human experience. It wasn't part of Adam and Eve's experience though.

I have never tried inhaling solvent because I trust those who tell me they can be instantaneously deadly. If I ignore the warnings.

But you know what death is.

I think the trouble is you are stretching the metaphors but it is said of atheists that they share the same biblical literalism as er, Biblical literalists.

I can't both be stretching the metaphors and sharing Biblical literalism. Literalism is the idea that it isn't metaphor at all.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

1. Nobody told them that it was wrong to do that. As I said before: it would have been helpful if God had warned Adam and Eve not to trust the Serpent.

2. The Serpent turned out to be right.


What's that supposed to mean? Were they sexually abusing him?
I know what death is because it is a fact of human experience. It wasn't part of Adam and Eve's experience though.
But you know what death is. I can't both be stretching the metaphors and sharing Biblical literalism. Literalism is the idea that it isn't metaphor at all.

I think we are talking about spiritual death. Now there can be understanding of that both intellectual and spiritual even though nobody living yet knows what final spiritual death is nobody living has experienced physical death first hand. What they did know is God but chose to not trust him. The first thing to be surrendered then was a right relationship with God  which frankly is the main point.

Yes we know what death is and yes we see evil.....but that does not seem to be any deterrent to people trying solvent abuse or doing the wrong thing.

[ippy]

Your wilful desire not to accept anything referring to the Holy Bible is not only scientific neglect but it is also down right foolishness. Almighty God said that He created the universe and, as you might guess, He has massaged this knowledge into His Word so that all those who obey Him can have access to that science and especially the Gospels where Jesus showed us what happens to our spirit in death. If we were righteous we could be resurrected but because we are not we must settle for rebirth and there are many examples of rebirth on YouTube...but, if we are ignorant of this truth, or refuse to acknowledge the purpose of Jesus Christ's great sacrifice, we will be just left swirling around the ether until it is emptied into the fiery lake of sulphur...coming soon.

Couldn't see any evidence for this god idea of yours there Nick, as you should know asserting, well we can all assert anything we like so  where's this elusive evidence for the existence of god gone?

ippy.

[NicholasMarks]

It's Garden metaphor.
He's warning them against the consequences of knowing both Good and evil.

Actually, I suspect that this is a message in parable form...cleaned up a little so that the innocent who read it aren't overwhelmed by it...and suitable for children. I say this because both Adam and Eve covered their intimate parts just as a child tries to hide the evidence of its wrongdoing, but in doing so give clear indication of their misbehaviour, like say, denying eating chocolate, even before being asked and whilst having the evidence all over their mouth. Sin is a misbehaviour that is destructive to our health...to our genetic health in particular...and we can deduce that Adam and Eve's sin impacted upon their genetic health. The inference being that we can repair our genetic malfunctions if we yield to righteousness which is the expressed code of Jesus Christ. This thinking is reinforced by the next parable based teaching that the serpent would grovel on its belly deceiving women and the women would kick him in the head whilst deceiving the serpent...all concerning a massive abuse that impacted upon Almighty God's new project in a nasty and spiteful way...an abuse we are still paying for because God knew we would have to reach this point in our history to realise just how massive that sin was. I think that Almighty God wants us to see it in the terms He described for the reasons I described and that's how it should remain. 

[NicholasMarks]

Couldn't see any evidence for this god idea of yours there Nick, as you should know asserting, well we can all assert anything we like so  where's this elusive evidence for the existence of god gone?

ippy.

It's all in the Holy Bible. The book you refuse to acknowledge but which tells us exactly where the good, the bad, and the ugly will finish up. No one is going to Heaven except the 144000 to wait for the Judgement when they will return with the Son of Man and set up the righteous kingdom that is to come...the new heavens and the new Earth. Many here on Earth are practicing for that event all with varying Christian codes, but with willing hearts and as long as the individual relates to the righteous code of Jesus they will be saved. The ugly will go into the fiery lake of sulphur...they had their chance and fluffed it...The bad can repent but I'm not convinced that many will...but I'll pray for them anyway.

When our Deity say that there is only one accurate path to righteousness and we know that science is embedded within every aspect of the universe we know that righteousness is the science that we need to understand, to enable us to understand all other sciences...otherwise it would all clash...and as is proven by Albert Einstein, Nikola Tesla, Jesus Christ, and Almighty God, Himself...everything is energy, and this energy is all around us all the time...especially in the construction and maintenance of the living cell.

Think outside the box for a change and think yourself into the Holy Bible...the master scientific book showing us how the spiritual mechanics of the universe belong to a space-age science...that we will all be heading into except for the awkward, the difficult, the spiteful, the unrighteous, and the followers of Satan...summed up in Revelation 21:8.

[Dicky Underpants]

It's all in the Holy Bible. The book you refuse to acknowledge but which tells us exactly where the good, the bad, and the ugly will finish up. No one is going to Heaven except the 144000 to wait for the Judgement when they will return with the Son of Man and set up the righteous kingdom that is to come...the new heavens and the new Earth. Many here on Earth are practicing for that event all with varying Christian codes, but with willing hearts and as long as the individual relates to the righteous code of Jesus they will be saved. The ugly will go into the fiery lake of sulphur...they had their chance and fluffed it...The bad can repent but I'm not convinced that many will...but I'll pray for them anyway.

When our Deity say that there is only one accurate path to righteousness and we know that science is embedded within every aspect of the universe we know that righteousness is the science that we need to understand, to enable us to understand all other sciences...otherwise it would all clash...and as is proven by Albert Einstein, Nikola Tesla, Jesus Christ, and Almighty God, Himself...everything is energy, and this energy is all around us all the time...especially in the construction and maintenance of the living cell.

Think outside the box for a change and think yourself into the Holy Bible...the master scientific book showing us how the spiritual mechanics of the universe belong to a space-age science...that we will all be heading into except for the awkward, the difficult, the spiteful, the unrighteous, and the followers of Satan...summed up in Revelation 21:8.

First paragraph largely from the Jehovah's Witnesses manual (except the bit about the Lake of Fire)
The rest straight from NM's fantasies about what he thinks science is.

[Stranger]

...and as is proven by Albert Einstein, Nikola Tesla, Jesus Christ, and Almighty God, Himself...everything is energy, and this energy is all around us all the time...especially in the construction and maintenance of the living cell.

Yet another blatant falsehood about science. Everything is not energy, in fact nothing at all is energy - energy is a property of things.

So, are you totally ignorant about science or are you just a liar?

[Outrider]

And again I am addressing what you are saying by calling it an appeal for a consequence free universe.

Any moral judgement is beyond inevitable consequence and into judgements, a very different classification of events.  Pots breaking when they fall off a shelf is a consequence - punishment for breaking the pots is a socially and culturally influenced judgement.

As I keep pointing out, sin and it's consequences should have cut off mankind from God.

Why? If sin is in us because God failed to adequately arrange the garden so that Adam and Eve were not at risk of eating the fruit, why should we be 'cut off from God'?  Why are we punished for Adam and Eve's actions whilst under God's insufficient care?

But in Christ Jesus God takes the effects on himself thus the way to God is open.

Nothing changes.  We were liable to punishment if we didn't atone/repent/get lucky, God makes himself a temporary scapegoat, and we're still liable to punishment if we don't atone/repent/get lucky...  It's another pointless piece of bloodshed.

Should you choose not to take that route it is not because of anything Adam did, it is because you choose not to take that route.

It's because the onus shouldn't be on us to apologise for the malice of a substandard carer over-reacting to the actions of a mentally incapable ward.

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Any moral judgement is beyond inevitable consequence and into judgements, a very different classification of events.  Pots breaking when they fall off a shelf is a consequence - punishment for breaking the pots is a socially and culturally influenced judgement.

An important part of this is, is the judgment that the pot, a metaphor for the relationship with God is broken.

Why? If sin is in us because God failed to adequately arrange the garden so that Adam and Eve were not at risk of eating the fruit, why should we be 'cut off from God'?  Why are we punished for Adam and Eve's actions whilst under God's insufficient care?

This would remove the option of choosing to be or remain in relation to God.

Nothing changes.  We were liable to punishment if we didn't atone/repent/get lucky, God makes himself a temporary scapegoat, and we're still liable to punishment if we don't atone/repent/get lucky...  It's another pointless piece of bloodshed.

Whatever damage Adam did to our relationship with God Christ has overturned. What remains is the choice to be or not be with God.

It's because the onus shouldn't be on us to apologise for the malice of a substandard carer over-reacting to the actions of a mentally incapable ward.

You arentrequired to answer for Adams sins or his breaking of the relationship. All you have in regard to God are your own actions and whether you choose or reject him.

[Outrider]

An important part of this is, is the judgment that the pot, a metaphor for the relationship with God is broken.

When the relationship between parent and child breaks down, do you blame the child?

This would remove the option of choosing to be or remain in relation to God.

No, the default could be 'you are saved, unless you do something grotesque and earn punishment in your own right'.  You still have the option, but the starting position is not 'punishment for someone else's actions'.

Whatever damage Adam did to our relationship with God Christ has overturned.

In what way?  We were judged and liable for punishment for someone else's actions before Jesus, and we still are now... what's changed?

What remains is the choice to be or not be with God.

And, again, I'll point out that such a 'choice' isn't really a choice, it's a threat.

You aren't required to answer for Adams sins or his breaking of the relationship.

You might want to tell pretty much every Christian denomination in history that, because I'm pretty sure Adam and the fall of man leading to our inherently sinful nature is a pretty big part of pretty much all the doctrine.

All you have in regard to God are your own actions and whether you choose or reject him.

And his threats.  And his judgement of me based on someone else's activities.  And his apparent rejection of any responsibility for his failings in the Garden of Eden.  Apart from that, all I have are my own actions (which according to some denominations make no difference, as I recall - Calvinism?) .

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

When the relationship between parent and child breaks down, do you blame the child?

No, You take any damage incurred on the break up on yourself and you remain open for your Child to reopen relationship as per their choice. If they return you do all you can to reduce damage incurred during there estrangement.

Rather like God has done.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

When the relationship between parent and child breaks down, do you blame the child?

No, the default could be 'you are saved, unless you do something grotesque and earn punishment in your own right'.  You still have the option, but the starting position is not 'punishment for someone else's actions'.

Salvation is a relationship with God.

The starting position is that Adams fault is negated.And that even availled for Adam.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

No, You take any damage incurred on the break up on yourself and you remain open for your Child to reopen relationship as per their choice. If they return you do all you can to reduce damage incurred during there estrangement.

Rather like God has done.

If it was my child I wouldn’t have ended the relationship in the first place, and it would be unconditional – I wouldn’t make its continuance subject to the child meeting certain conditions and jumping through various hoops.

But hey that’s just me – I guess that means I'm a better parent than the manipulative monster you “worship”.     

[Outrider]

No, You take any damage incurred on the break up on yourself and you remain open for your Child to reopen relationship as per their choice.

So why doesn't God appear capable of that level of understanding?  Why is God's response a threat of 'come to me or suffer eternally'?

If they return you do all you can to reduce damage incurred during there estrangement.

Of course, but you try to ensure that any offer of openness is a genuine one.

Rather like God has done.

Completely unlike the threat that God appears to deliver in the guise of an offer of salvation from his wrath...

Salvation is a relationship with God.

Salvation is, apparently, acquiescence to the terms of a domineering and controlling narcissist.

The starting position is that Adams fault is negated.

Notwithstanding the above where I feel I've shown adequately that God blaming Adam is just an obvious piece of scapegoating for his own ineptitude, you still haven't shown how anything has changed following the temporary sacrifice of Jesus - what's different afterwards to before?

O.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

Salvation is a relationship with God.

"...Terms & Conditions apply."

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So why doesn't God appear capable of that level of understanding?  Why is God's response a threat of 'come to me or suffer eternally'?

Of course, but you try to ensure that any offer of openness is a genuine one.

Completely unlike the threat that God appears to deliver in the guise of an offer of salvation from his wrath...

Salvation is, apparently, acquiescence to the terms of a domineering and controlling narcissist.

Firstly why do you think the offer opened to you is not genuine.

God does offers salvation and has demonstrated it in a temporal act and an eternal act in the incarnation and death of Christ.

As Christ says I don’t call you slaves but friends. But if you were in a relationship how do you think he would domineer and control you all for his benefit and none for yours?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

Firstly why do you think the offer opened to you is not genuine.

Your inability to demonstrate your premises (“god” etc) in the first place is a pretty good reason. What makes you think the leprechauns’ offer of gold at the ends of rainbows is not genuine?   

God does offers salvation and has demonstrated it in a temporal act and an eternal act in the incarnation and death of Christ.

So the myth claims. So?

In the story “He” also loads the offer with Ts & Cs, which is the morally grim part. 

As Christ says I don’t call you slaves but friends. But if you were in a relationship how do you think he would domineer and control you all for his benefit and none for yours?

Then Christ’s (supposed) words and his actions contradict each other. Do you make your friendships with others conditional on them worshipping you, following your rules etc? At least with actual slaves you can escape the slave owner by dying… 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

Your inability to demonstrate your premises (“god” etc) in the first place is a pretty good reason. What makes you think the leprechauns’ offer of gold at the ends of rainbows is not genuine?   

So the myth claims. So?

In the story “He” also loads the offer with Ts & Cs, which is the morally grim part. 

Then Christ’s (supposed) words and his actions contradict each other. Do you make your friendships with others conditional on them worshipping you, following your rules etc? At least with actual slaves you can escape the slave owner by dying…

Hi would expect my friends to realise who I was, and what I was about and not to be my friends  for Expediancy or enemy for expediency.