omnipotent beings discussion

[eaglebuzz]

It's clear then that you understand the love side but not the judgement side.

What I can say quite confidently is that no amount of back and forth forum posting is going to change your mind, and your exegesis of these passages is too superficial to change mine. So I'll leave it here.

 

[eaglebuzz]

I can't answer that question satisfactorily here, the answer involves 20 years of life and hundreds of books.

 

[MuzztheEagle]

It's clear then that you understand the love side but not the judgement side.

What I can say quite confidently is that no amount of back and forth forum posting is going to change your mind, and your exegesis of these passages is too superficial to change mine. So I'll leave it here.

But why should we take religion seriously? Why should we allow people to make hateful comments and actions with religious protection? If you are unable or unwilling to explain to me why your views deserve respect then they don't!

 

[eaglebuzz]

But why should we take religion seriously? Why should we allow people to make hateful comments and actions with religious protection? If you are unable or unwilling to explain to me why your views deserve respect then they don't!

Freedom of speech. End of. I don't care if you don't respect my views but you have no right to silence them.

 

[MuzztheEagle]

I can't answer that question satisfactorily here, the answer involves 20 years of life and hundreds of books.

That's the third time I've heard that on hear! But no one is yet to deliver in even a portion of that story. Why don't you get me started on my own journey? Where should I start, or where did you?
I promise you I do actually have a very open mind, but also a sceptical one.

 

[eaglebuzz]

That's the third time I've heard that on hear! But no one is yet to deliver in even a portion of that story. Why don't you get me started on my own journey? Where should I start, or where did you?
I promise you I do actually have a very open mind, but also a sceptical one.

Probably because people come onto this site to talk Manly not religion

 

[MuzztheEagle]

Probably because people come onto this site to talk Manly not religion

Yet here we are! And whenever someone makes a comment on it many are quick to lead to its defence.

Freedom of speech. End of. I don't care if you don't respect my views but you have no right to silence them.

Godwins law anyone?
No one is trying to silence you, rather highlight the irrelevance and flaws of your views.

 

[eaglebuzz]

That's the third time I've heard that on hear! But no one is yet to deliver in even a portion of that story. Why don't you get me started on my own journey? Where should I start, or where did you?
I promise you I do actually have a very open mind, but also a sceptical one.

If you're serious I suggest you start by reading 'Mere Christianity' by CS Lewis

 

[MuzztheEagle]

If you're serious I suggest you start by reading 'Mere Christianity' by CS Lewis

Will do, I will be back with my thoughts in a few days 🙂

 

[eaglebuzz]

[/QUOTE]

Godwins law anyone?
No one is trying to silence you, rather highlight the irrelevance and flaws of your views.

Nobody mentioned Hitler.

You asked why we should allow people to speak with protection, because without that protection people are attacked for what they say and silenced.

You haven't shown the irrelevance of anything, just a really superficial understanding of the Bible.

Edit. I don't mean that last comment to sound harsh, but many of the sayings of Jesus fit into the broader biblical context and if you read them in isolation you will not understand them.

 

[MuzztheEagle]

Nobody mentioned Hitler.

That was more about me...I was biting my tongue to not go down that road. Many on here would have. 🙂

You asked why we should allow people to speak with protection, because without that protection people are attacked for what they say and silenced.

You haven't shown the irrelevance of anything, just a really superficial understanding of the Bible.

Edit. I don't mean that last comment to sound harsh, but many of the sayings of Jesus fit into the broader biblical context and if you read them in isolation you will not understand them.

People should be protected, ideas should not. And you have an idea that you cannot justify, that idea is irrelevant. If I went round saying that magical fairies told me that black people were evil - would that ok? Is that view relevant? Should it be taken seriously?

 

[MuzztheEagle]

Here's the thing that really gets me. How can you believe in the idea of an all loving and forgiving God and believe in the concept of eternal hell? The two are so oppositional.

 

[Eagle thru 'n' thru]

Here's a couple, I can keep going if you want.

For all the talk of love there is a hell of a lot of violence:
Matthew 5:28-29:
But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.
Matthew 13:41-42:
The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. They will throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Mark 9:45-46:
And if your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell.
1 Samuel 15:3:
Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.

Jesus may have preached love and acceptance and all that but he never spoke out about the past teachings of God and the old testament God is one nasty piece of work.
Matthew 5:17-19:
Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.


Who were the gospels written by:
Christian and non Christian scholars agree that Jesus was crucified around 30AD. Yet the best estimates for the gospels are around 40-80 years later. And the people who wrote them were not eyewitnesses to the "miracles" of Jesus.

Hi Muzz. There's no problem with any of the bible versres you quoted. Jesus isn't literally tell you to gouge out eyes if looking lustfully at a woman. His teach as all bible scholars agree is that a drastic change of behaviour is needed. For example, if a recovering alcholic walks home from the station and a pub is on the route home, it would be much more beneficial and wise to either catch a bus home, walk a different route even if it takes and extra 5 minutes longer, anything but walk past that pub. Jesus is teaching is that drastic action is needed to nip temptation that leads to sin in the bud. The picture language used by Jesus is strong for good reason.

 

[Eagle thru 'n' thru]

Yes, I have kids and no matter what I did I would not commit violence against them or doom them to eternal damnation. It's like saying: "I only hit you because I love you". It's abuse. As a parent I would be questioning where I went wrong. But then I'm only human, I can't be perfect.
God on the other hand is perfect - but he gives his children the lure of temptation and then punishes them for taking it. There is nothing my son could do that would make me cast him out of our home. I would want to understand what went wrong, I would want to know how we could make things better. Yes I would be upset, but with time comes forgiveness and understanding.
But for God, it's simple you fail to play by my rules (even when they aren't clear) and you will be punished....eternally.

There are essential information about God not being mentioned in these discussions. It is God's sovereignity and holiness that gives him every authority to judge the unforgiven sin in sinners, the unbelief of sinners, to punish and condemn them to eternal punishment. Human are not sovereign over creation, nor are humans holy, so we don't have any right to judge God's perfect judgement. God's holiness and sovereignity causes him to judge perfectly, then his judgement of sin should've been justifiably excuted when Adam and Eve disobeyed God at the beginning. It's God' love, mercy and grace that he left time on earth to conitinue as long as it has. The culmination of this love, mercy and grace is perfectly displayed in the cross of Christ where sin is forgiven and available for all.

 

[MuzztheEagle]

And as for the idea of the universe bursting into existence from NOTHING … that is a problem for the New Athiests as Nounan explains in this book.

Plus it's just a guess really isn't? How can someone claim to know what happened apparently millions of years ago.... or is it billions 😉 ? Ridiculous claim!
I'll look into the book you spoke of sounds interesting. 🙂

I've been over this before, but lets try again;
No one believes in the Big Bang over God. The big bang is scientific a model which we use to describe the universe's current state (to our current understanding). Ask a physicist (or me) what there was before the big bang and they will answer that they don't know.
What's more, ask the majority of atheists if they are certain that no god exists and they will answer no (including Dawkins). No one is trying to replace or disprove god. Religions, on the other hand are based on lies or fairy tales that allow people to discriminate and cheat one another. People are quickly learning this, and it's why religion is dying quickly in educated countries.

 

[MuzztheEagle]

There are essential information about God not being mentioned in these discussions. It is God's sovereignity and holiness that gives him every authority to judge the unforgiven sin in sinners, the unbelief of sinners, to punish and condemn them to eternal punishment. Human are not sovereign over creation, nor are humans holy, so we don't have any right to judge God's perfect judgement. God's holiness and sovereignity causes him to judge perfectly, then his judgement of sin should've been justifiably excuted when Adam and Eve disobeyed God at the beginning. It's God' love, mercy and grace that he left time on earth to conitinue as long as it has. The culmination of this love, mercy and grace is perfectly displayed in the cross of Christ where sin is forgiven and available for all.

Wow....God is all powerful therefor he can do whatever he wants. If he is so soveriegn and holy why does he demand our worship? Can I extend this principle to my sons? I gave them life and a home, does that make them mine to do as I will? If we hold ourselves to standards why would a God be immune to the same standards. He sounds like a dick and if I get to the afterlife and it is the abrahmic god I promise you I will asking a lot of questions and if there aren't good answers I will tell him to get f***ked.
If he is so all powerful and holy then why not give all people the information they need to understand his love? Why have children born into Muslim/Hindu/etc homes where they will spend their lives in sin and never knowing his word and are then cast into eternal damnation.

 

[Eagle thru 'n' thru]

In Mathew, it is unclear on who the message of Jesus was meant for. But it doesn't appear to be one of inclusion:

Matthew 28:19
Make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit
Matthew 10:5–6
These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.”
Matthew 15:24–6
[Jesus rejected her plea to heal her daughter, saying] “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”
The woman came and knelt before him. “Lord, help me!” she said.
He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”
(Bit harsh IMO!!!)

Muzz, have you taken these scriptures to a minister of religion? Could you take these questions to a christian minister? If not, why not? They would be able to offer you answers. Why not ring the local Anglican church and set up a meeting with a pastor and present your questions. It's not hard to do and I hope you do.

 

[MuzztheEagle]

Muzz, have you taken these scriptures to a minister of religion? Could you take these questions to a christian minister? If not, why not? They would be able to offer you answers. Why not ring the local Anglican church and set up a meeting with a pastor and present your questions. It's not hard to do and I hope you do.

Lol, Funny that you specify the denomination. Maybe I should take the scripture to a range of priests and ministers and compile the findings. In particular, lets look at the example of gay relationships. I'm guessing you don't agree with the uniting church's take on the scripture 🙂

 

[MuzztheEagle]

Muzz, have you taken these scriptures to a minister of religion? Could you take these questions to a christian minister? If not, why not? They would be able to offer you answers. Why not ring the local Anglican church and set up a meeting with a pastor and present your questions. It's not hard to do and I hope you do.

If I gave you similar passages from Islam how would you respond to those?
Al – Baqara 2: 228 “Men, your wives are your tillage. Go into your tillage any way you want.”
Does this require proper translation? By who? You may get many answers.
Or is it simply irrelevant as it's not the true religion and it's not the true religion because verses like this are evil. A Muslim could offer the same logic in choosing Islam over Christianity.
If your god is so all powerful and loving you would think he would make things clearer or even appear in a time where things can be recorded accurately and shared between everyone. But no, we have to trust him - he knows what's best.

 

[MuzztheEagle]

I suggest you read "Thoughtful Theism … Redeeming Reason in an Irrational Age" by Andrew Nounan. His simple but lucid explanation of Thomas Aquinas's first argument for the existence of God has never be adequately refuted, even by noted athiests such as Richard Dawkins or Bertrand Russell.

Thomas Aquinas argument has been refuted. It's called the god of the gaps fallacy. I don't know therefore god.
Personally I have no problem in saying that I don't know but, if you do choose god then which god? And why? You are no closer to an answer than I.