He loved Job so much he killed his whole family, sure he gave him another one, but maybe Job would have like to have kept his first family, but the members of Jobs first family were just pawns in a bet that God had with the Devil, the Job story would sugest we are all nothing but pawn in a game created by a God who stacks the rules against us, what kind of a father would treat his children as nothing but pawns.
Anyone who's actually read Job ought to recognize that the Christian God is a cowardly asshole. Unfortunately, a large portion of Christianity is dedicated to ignoring obvious character flaws.
I believe that if we are to be in God's image, we cannot be happy to see His creation suffer, so we must forgive and trust that God is just. That means that we must not be judgmental, however difficult that may be. As only God can know whether a person deserves forgiveness or not, so we must leave it to him and become as a child. We are told to forgive as we would be forgiven, however difficult that may be, which is the opposite of revenge. I am not saying this as one who has not suffered.
At least he's honest here; religions do not know, they believe, they have faith. In what? A book. Please. Not many will sit still for that anymore.
We are in a growing phase where one life leads to another; we should not fear judgement at this stage. We were presumably just "hatched"; ch. talk about being judged and having to worry about going to hell? Fear rules people in religion. Don't believe, go to hell forever. Think people.
@jonesgerard You may not "believe" that those who don't believe go to hell, I'm just quoting ch. theology. And, just to play devil's advocate, how do YOU know they don't go to hell? When you start playing the dogmatic game and belong to a belief system, you have to stay within the rules set up for you. What you call experiencing god is certainly not the highest intelligence of any existence. You may have had some sort of experience, and say you have faith in that feeling, cont.
@rovingdesertfox Its an untrue and incorrect quote, non believers don't go to hell, not knowing is not a mortal sin. I know they don't go to hell because it wouldn't make sense.
You don't know what I have experienced so you're guessing and you are limited to opinion, not experience.
Atheism is a form of truth seeking, thats not a sin.
@jonesgerard I think the whole paradigm of sin and no sin is ridiculous. Our souls come here to experience in this body on this planet. When we die we move on, review our life here and then go somewhere else to learn more. I didn't experience what you experienced, but how is it you KNOW you experienced "God"? From my understanding there are many dimensions and many beings who have the power to appear in any form they wish to impress those who cannot tell the difference. How do you know?
@rovingdesertfox My definition of sin is "that which seperates (causes seperation) me from God".
Not knowing God or about God doesn't cause seperation, my pushing God out does.
That takes concerted action on my part.
Having a conscious contact with God is unmistakable, theres no mistaking it for an LSD flashback or whatever. But for me it was also easy to miss because it was so subtle, all I saw was the result and realized my mind had changed fundamentally.
@jonesgerard Are 'you" your body or the soul/essence/spirit in your body? If your soul/essence/spirit, then you cannot be separated from God. We take a drink of forgetfullness coming into this world, so that we can experience life here without remembering that we are actually a part of God. (I 'awoke' about 20 yrs. ago to all of the unreality here on earth, and could see through that which was not real, but I wouldn't say I had conscious contact with God.)
@jonesgerard Are 'you" your body or the soul/essence/spirit in your body? If your soul/essence/spirit, then you cannot be separated from God. We take a drink of forgetfullness coming into this world, so that we can experience life here without remembering that we are actually a part of God. (I 'awoke' about 20 yrs. ago to all of the unreality here on earth, and could see through that which was not real, but I wouldn't say I had conscious contact with God.)
@jonesgerard Are 'you" your body or the soul/essence/spirit in your body? If your soul/essence/spirit, then you cannot be separated from God. We take a drink of forgetfullness coming into this world, so that we can experience life here without remembering that we are actually a part of God. (I 'awoke' about 20 yrs. ago to all of the unreality here on earth, and could see through that which was not real, but I wouldn't say I had conscious contact with God.)
@jonesgerard but there is NO way ANYONE has experienced the top dog. You are on your own path and are learning at your own pace, as is everyone. The ego is given to us to use in this 3d world. It does not have to be abandoned. Btw, I'm not saying there is no god, just that the god of the bible and the religions is not the top guy. Check out astro-theology, by Jordan Maxwell or Santos Bonacci to see where the big three religions came from. It's all based on control over the masses.
@jonesgerard Again I will ask, how do you know it was God? There are many entities in dimensions above ours who delight in deceiving man. Surely you must understand that. I would go so far as to say no one on earth has the capability to identify contact with any entity in a form higher than the physical, unless you have gone out of body and are versed in the workings of the spirit world. And if you are, we would all love to hear more about what it's like. A feeling is not a fact.
@rovingdesertfox I know it was God because I had to work Gods will ( not mine) to get the result.
I followed the 12 steps of AA and the result was exactly as I was promised.
The obsessions disappeared, the insanity melted away, the fundamental fear vanished.
The problem was removed, its gone.
I don't know about the spirit world, I know theres a conscious entity in my mind that will kill me if given the chance and without God I have no defense. So I'm no saint.
@jonesgerard I worked the program also, but only when I left it did I get rid of my addiction. If I would say God was part of that paradigm, then God healed me, but I don't attribute my turn around to God, just to a maturation process.
@awakeningaletheia Are you a Jehovah's withness by any chance? I feel like I've heard you speak before. I am a child of God now and will spend the rest of my life getting to know the ultimate father. In the garden, God created us to LOVE us. Your comment about a merciful God is a little rose tinted. God is merciful, he is also just. Again I am only human, I spend my time learning about God and having a relationship with him, everything else is secondary. Thank you for being polite :)
@OmoItsekiri I am glad to hear that you don't care what the church in the past thought, for I would completely agree with you that we must base everything on sound scripture. Ha no I am not a Jehovah's Witness and I never plan on being one. Yes our ultimate purpose of ever being created was to share in our Father's love and innumerable attributes. I am not in lala land about God's judgments either, he will punish the wicked, scripture makes that clear. Continue to study and learn of Jesus.
@OmoItsekiri God is merciful and just, not merciful but just. You see in the church we have a bad habit of making it seem like his mercy and justice are separate entities. However I would scripturally say that Love is his defining attribute, and that everything is driven by this love. His justice is driven by his love and so his anger lasts but a moment and his mercy is new everyday (Psalm 30:5, Lam 3:22-23). Understanding God we then understand how he is just, and not vengeful but corrective
@OmoItsekiri P.S. Eternal punishment affects everyone, for we are to love even out enemies. If we love all then seeing anyone in torment will mentally torment us. That is if we truly have the love of God is us. The love of God is not wimpy as some have tried to imply, it is a flame of fire that is stronger than the grave. His jealousy is connected to his love, everything comes back to love in the end.
@awakeningaletheia 'I will wipe away every tear from their eyes...' I do not believe I will be tormented by knowing people are in hell, you can not say that for sure. I of course won't enjoy it, but I will not suffer for it, not even mentally. If you make your choice, then that's that. But I respect your point of view.
@MrGoodNKinky To clarify, God didn't force the knowledge of 'good and and evil' on anyone. The choice for Adam and Eve was to eat that 1 fruit or every other in the garden. THEY chose 'the knowledge of good and evil'. Please read the account, then state your point.
@MrGoodNKinky Hi. Adam and Eve had 'Free will' before the fall, therefore sin is not the same as free will. the knowledge of good and evil was distinct from free will. It may very well have been the rebellion against God BY eating the fruit. Not so much the fruit (or the knowledge of good and evil) itself, but the decision to eat inspite of the warning not to. How do you know animals do not have SOME understanding of good and evil? Justing saying, how much proof it there of that really?
@MrGoodNKinky The knowledge of good and evil is not sin, because God has knowledge of good and evil. The sin was to disobey God, which in the end only led too the currrent miserable state of the world in general, it was for our own good. I don't believe I have said or done anything to warrant you calling me an idiot, that's hurtful. I strongly dislike talking to people with no manners, but I won't go down the road of insulting you.
@MrGoodNKinky Animals have been out in situations where they have chosen to do good or evil. I do not think there is enough scientific evidence against it. The christian message is 'for God loved the world so much that he gave his only begotten son, that who so ever believes in him shall not perish, but have everlasting life'. The old testament is a result of eating the fruit, only God is able to be above the law, but by not listening Adam and Eve made us subject to it.
@MrGoodNKinky Is the law evil? Is it wrong for the law to say do not kill, steal, envy etc? Are you for real? Thats your arguement? Be reasonable it's not the same. I'm not even going to try to address this point.
@MrGoodNKinky The punishment, as the bible terms it, is eternal separation from God, CHOSEN by people. You seem to be speaking out of pain. I'm not sure that if you ever read the bible, you understood what it was saying. If you were a spoon fed Christian who didn't know God personally, I'm not surprised at your current plight. I'm sorry if you encountered religious people instead of real Christians. I suggest you separate the 2 and stop generalising and lying about what you don't know. Goodbye.
@MrGoodNKinky You are really funny, I will not be speaking to you anymore. I only speak to people who have the curtesy to speak to me as I do them. You are only interested in arguing, so I can't be bothered. Goodbye, God speed :)
@OmoItsekiri My friend MrGoodNKindky has a point, while he may have presented it rudely it still has credence. the Bible (as far as the English translations are concerned) does not teach eternal separation but eternal punishment and destruction (this all based off of 5-10 verses out of about 1000 pages of the Bible). Sure you can say weeping, gnashing teeth, perishing, and death all mean eternal punishment, but that is reading into the text something that is just not there.
@awakeningaletheia Hi, It may be eternal punishment, or ceasing to exist 'like chaff burnt in flames' psalms 1. If God is not in hell and whoever goes there is there for all eternity, you can deduce eternal separation from God. It is for those who reject God an therefore all that is of him
@awakeningaletheia Hell is for those who chose to live apart from God (therefore everything of and related to him), he respects that choice. I won't go on about this, I do not like to argue unnecessarily. I simply wanted your friend to Judge the book not the people who claim to follow and understand it without actually doing so. Read the whole bible, don't just pick up quotes here and there. You have to see the origins of the account, why and how it reaches certain conclusions.
@OmoItsekiri I don't like needless debate either, but all of of scripture is clear on this.
Revelation 14:9-10
If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand...he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.
2 Thess 1:9
They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction that comes from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might (ESV alternate rendering)
@awakeningaletheia I don't understand. Are you saying God will be IN hell? 1 can live apart from God, he is present yet not in sense. Hell, is the second death Christ died and rose to save us from. People in the new earth will live WITH God in his presence, while those in hell won't. The bible mentions God's presence leaving people, places. I believe 'Omnipresence' refers to God's ability to be everywhere, but it does not limit his ability to remove his presence from an area.
@OmoItsekiri You do understand that the idea of eternal separation is a fairly new doctrine right (about 100 years old). The church in centuries past thought that Hell was a place where God reigned his wrath on the ungodly for all eternity, he was the tormentor not the devil, this is easily proven by seeing that Satan is tormented in hell, if he is tormented then how can he torment? There is an intimate presence of God and an omnipresence, God is in hell according to tradition
@awakeningaletheia Quote me on this I never said satan would torment, he is suffering too and everyone he tricked into turning away from God. What the 'Church' thought is not the point, it is what is in the bible. If you mean the catholics, I am not catholic and it wasn't the only denomination that existed, we have more history about it. People will have different interpretations. I think we can agree hell is not a great place to be in, that is the material point.
@OmoItsekiri Of course I believe in neither view of hell, for they make God out to be less merciful and loving than he really is. I ask you to ponder what the second death is, don't assume that it is eternal torment. The first death is the one that came through Adam, a physical death. What is the second death? What is the thing that conquers Death and Hell, for the Lake of Fire destroys them does it not? What is the Lake of Fire?
@awakeningaletheia Moses asked what his name was, reply 'I am that I am'. Human language can't contain him. Your definition of God is never going to be accurate, you can't fully understand people how can you understand the intelligence that created them? I think I mentioned, there is is a belief in eternal torment and also complete destruction (being ceasing to exist). I don't concentrate on that, it doesn't apply to me. I'm not planning on going so I try to find out more about the other place.
That is what he thinks. And God should be all powerfull, so he should be able to come here. Also he came around a lot in the Bible, why is it part of the suffering now and not back then. Also, why not appear to ancient cultures where there were humansacrafices to weather Gods and Gods of war and so on? That is what I'd like to know.
@therexCo , He really wants us to search? Kind of like an easter egg hunt! Pretty warped if you ask me! No, It would make more sense to reveal himself like he did in the bible, say like with Moses! After he revealed himself in a loving caring way most people would want more without a doubt, and those who still rejected him, well, their loss!
@99minerkc You think? I'm not so sure myself...you mention Moses, yet when Moses was on Sinai for only 40 days the people turned and started worshipping the golden calf. These were the same people who were just delivered from Egypt by God himself, and still they turn on Him.
I'd be inclined to think that if God were actually more direct, people would then be complaining that He's too forceful; complaining that they''d at least like a choice. Just a thought anyway...
@ScottyVOR If you read my entire post I said that some would reject him and it would be their loss! No, people wouldn't say he would be too forceful IF this god is truly ALL loving and ALL powerful! Think about the level of love people would be experiencing! Nothing like anyone has ever experienced ever before! The love would envelope the people who he revealed himself to! People forget aboult that!
@99minerkc Isn't that the world we find ourselves in though? Some people reject Him and it's their loss, and some accept and it's to their gain. The "enveloping love" you talk about is experienced by many - if you have time watch the Faisal Malick or Ian McCormack interviews, both on my channel - immense love there.
Remember love is a two-way thing - it must be both given and received voluntarily. To be voluntary, you must want it in the first place...seeking is the outward sign of wanting.
@ScottyVOR Sorry your comment doesn't fly! As I said, many, many more would believe if your god(if he existed)revealed himself! Why would a god hide in the closet when he could save the vast majority of his creation? He wouldn't! By the way, why is your god so hung up with sacrifices? They're throughout the OT and then you have jesus in the NT! (continued)
continued here: a true loving god would never punish all his creation for a screw up that Adam/eve did(and he set them up). No, a truly loving god would simply have forgiven them, period OR would have thought up a more loving way of forgiveness than his PATHETIC vicarious redemption! I'm more moral that your god(again, if he exists)!! There's nothing you could possibly offer me from your religion! I find it repulsive and wicked!! I'm just sorry that so many of you live as slaves!!
@99minerkc Slow down dude, you're bringing in a whole host of other subjects. First: you keep talking about a "loving" God, almost in a soppy, emotional way. God isn't that one dimensional - His love and mercy are certainly there, but so is absolute holiness and justice. There is a tension within God that any parent can appreciate - does He show mercy and not punish wilful wrong doing, or act justly and deliver the punishment people deserve? In fact His justice stems from His goodness. (cont)
(cont) Secondly: you seem to be expressing moral outrage about God's behaviour. Yet if God doesn't exist, objective morality doesn't exist (most atheist philosophers agree with this). When you label Christianity as "wicked" you're appealing to an objective morality than no longer exists; everything has become relative. Nothing is truly wrong on atheism...not God, not Christianity, not genocide, not rape, etc. All you're saying is that you personally dislike something, but it can never be wrong.
@ScottyVOR It's funny how you seem to have god all figured out at least "your version" of what a god should be by "your" standards! Other people's version(definition)of a god will look totally different! That's what makes your god so very, very man made! Put your god on a scale and you have an entire spectrum to choose from! Sorry but a god should not be able to have so many variations, at least in my opinion!
I did watch the vids on your channel and found them entertaining! Thanks for re
@99minerkc Sorry dude, I did assume there. Just out of interest, what would you call yourself?
As for "my version" of God, that's just the basic Judeo-Christian God. I didn't invent Him. :P
If God does exist, He must exist with certain attributes, such that there are right and wrong propositions about Him. Everyone can't be right, because many claims about the nature of God contradict each another. The existence of counterfeit money doesn't effect the existence of the genuine currency, right?
@ScottyVOR the god I see is "not" a personal god who watches your every move, who care what position you have sex in, who gets jealous, who punishes it's creation via suffering for an eternity, never ending, just simply because one can't wrap their head around and accept the concept of a personal god! What I see as a god(if you need to call it a god)is the same as Albert Einsteins.
@99minerkc Oh...you're more Deistic? This "higher power" is so far above all this messy stuff down here, right?
You mind helping me out with a few questions? Would you say he/it created the Universe? Is he/it personal? Does he/it care how we live (morally, if there is such a thing)? Cheers, I'm genuinely interested in how you answer these.
@ScottyVOR I already answered your questions except the morality one! Re- that one I'm likely more moral than most theists given that I abide by the laws "MAN" created(I have never been arrested)! Also, man kind survived long before your religion was born, so where did their sense of morality come from?
Name one moral deed a christian can do that a non-believer can't do! On the other hand. On the other hand how long does it take to think of an evil deed a christian has done in god's name??
@99minerkc Slow down bud, lets take one issue at a time. Re morality, if you believe in a deistic god that's far removed from us, then why should he care how we behave? You face the same problem as atheists; namely you have no objective grounds for right or wrong. If someone punches you in the face unprovoked, you don't like it (obviously), but you can't say he "shouldn't" have done so because that's appealing to an objective standard that can't/doesn't exist on your worldview. (cont)
(cont) As for some Christians being immoral...so what? There are hypocrites everywhere, and they will be judged as such, but that doesn't impugn the actual teaching of the NT.
Moral non-believers? Sure there are - there are plenty of them. Humans are designed by God as moral creatures with conscience, and live their lives discovering morality (to differing degrees of clarity). The point is that a personal God is required for morality to exist at all, not that non-believers can't be moral.
@ScottyVOR As we know man has been in tribes(groups)and somewhat civilized for at least 100,000 yrs and god did nothing, no intervention and mankind did fine! Then for some reason between 3-6 thousand years ago your god decides it's time to intervene?(lol). So before your god jumped in man created their own laws like what we have today! We CLEARLY do not need intervention from a god who advocates genocide, rape, murder, incest, and slavery! continued:
continued here: Again I will ask(in case you missed the first time I stated this), "Name one moral deed a christian can do that a non-believer can't do! On the other hand how long does it take to think of an evil(non-moral) deed a christian has done in god's name??"
@99minerkc "‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment." - Jesus.
I've yet to see a non-believer do that one. As for evil done in that name of God, see my last comment on hypocrites - you seem to have missed what I said.
As for the length of time, you are aware the forgiveness of the cross is retroactive? Abraham, Moses, etc were all right with God by looking forward to Jesus, just as we look back.
@ScottyVOR IF a non-believer chose to love your god they could do it! So, you still cannot say that there's a single moral thing a non believer can't do that a believer can! Your comment that forgiveness is retroactive is a lame attempt to justify that all people need redemption! Your belief that all need your god to be moral is lame too! All people living prior to the foundation(discovery?)of your religion lived both immoral and moral lives WITHOUT your god's objective morality! (cont:)
cont here: It's only "your opinion" that your god instilled his sense of morality in people's conscience, you have absolutely no proof that such a thing happened!! I like to think that people evolved over time! "They learned from their mistakes!"
@99minerkc ...Huh? If a non-believer chooses to love God then he must believe He exists, thus becoming a believer. You can't love nothing. A non-believer cannot love God, and thus cannot be completely moral (it's the "greatest commandment" for Pete's sake!).
I don't think you're grasping the full weight of the morality thing dude. If a personal God doesn't exist, objective morality doesn't exist. If objective morality doesn't exist then no one, believer or not, can be truly moral (cont).
(cont) Why? Because the objective standard by which we judge good and evil has been removed. Everything is reduced to subjectivity; personal taste. Being a baby rapist might be socially unfashionable, but it's not really wrong, and no one can tell him he shouldn't do it (why is your opinion better than his?). Why shouldn't the murderer murder? It's not like humanity is (or should be) going anywhere.
Think hard now - do you think we apprehend objective morality?
@ScottyVOR Are you kidding me? Do you really think our justice system is built on your god's laws? Not a chance!! Just because a bible is used to swear people in does not mean anything more than that!!! Our country is anything but a christian nation other than lip service and you know it! That being the case, the system is quite secular and it works, is it perfect? Far from it but it does work! As far as I'm concerned it can be an objective or subjective system so long as it works!!!
@ScottyVOR yes, they would become a believer, the point I'm making is that if they chose to they could do it, but I agree with you that they likely wouldn't do so! I'm not sure that objective morality doesn't exist without a god, but it doesn't matter! As I said in another post, mankind did fine for centuries before your religion was born, and it continues to work today, it isn't perfect, but it works! cont:
continued here: Denmark, an atheist country has a lower crime rate than the USA! Statistics show that atheist countries in general have lower crime rates than theist countries! Is a god needed? Not at all! Will there ever be a time when our world is without religion? I doubt it but one can hope!
@ScottyVOR I want to know "your" response. So, is all you have to say is that it was high school level arguments? Also, who is Bruce P.? I missed him?
@99minerkc By high school level arguments, I mean they really aren't sophisticated or even well thought out, yet they continue to make the rounds on Youtube in spite of strong Christian rebuttals in the philosophical & theological world. I'm surprised you listed it here to be honest - you'll be quoting Richard "call me a Bright" Dawkins next.
Buruc did a video response to ZJ, thought you might have seen it is all.
@ScottyVOR Well, I don't think that you're getting the point that I'm trying to make to you! I'm not suggesting that we get into an intellectual discussion on morality! For me anyway, basic common sense(call it HS level arguments if you need to)is sufficient! Here is another video which sums up what I believe here and it's entitled: "Hitchens on morality"
You can't say Hitchens, one of the top 100 intellectuals, has HS arguments so please watch. thanks.
@99minerkc Ignoring his usual straw-manning of the theist position, Hitchens is fighting from atheism, an incredibly intellectually compromised position. You'll notice he has to assume values like "human solidarity" and "getting on", without telling us why an individual should value such things. On atheism, why shouldn't the "psychopath" he refers to indulge in murder? Everyone is going to die anyway...why should we assume living is a good thing? Why is your subjective view better than mine?
BTW, Hitchens is one of the top 100 intellectuals? Your kidding right? Out of interest, what list are you using?
I did enjoy his debate with William Lane Craig though. If you haven't seen it do watch it, he gets absolutely destroyed by Craig. Even the atheist sites I frequent said as much.
@ScottyVOR Well, for starts I'll ask you this question: If your god spoke to you and said in a crystal clear manner to you, "I want you to kill kc". Of course you'll justify my comment by saying your god would never ask you to do that! Forget that come back as you cannot assume what your god wants or doesn't want! So, back to the question, would you kill me in your god's name if he commanded you to?
@99minerkc I think you recognise the weakness in the question, namely that He wouldn't ask such a thing. As such the point is moot. The only except in history was when, after 400 years of waiting for them to change, he used the Israelite army as the tool of His judgement on the sick and depraved Canaanite tribes (practising child sacrifice, bestiality, etc). Later when Israel became just as bad He did the same against them - using the Assyrians and Babylonians to impartially judge Israel.
I have a question for you. If both you and I were alone in some rural area, and you held intense hatred against me for some reason, would you kill me? Say that you knew for sure you could get away with it, and you had the will to kill me, would you? Would anything stop you?
If I met you in the street, I would be more likely to engage with you in friendly conversation, potentially befriending you.
However, if the situation were deperate enough, I would be capable of utilising you for nourishment - and no, if we got to that point (maybe in a life boat for weeks or months) then nothing in the universe would dissuade me. It'd be you or me.
But of course, this isnt an every day occurance and the situation would be extreme.
@ScottyVOR I dont think hatred would be enough. Its far less effort and danger to just keep away from you, but if you pose a threat or a danger to me or those who I love, then sure - I'd do you.
It wouldnt be because my imaginary friend ordered me to do so. If that were the case I'd be looking at treatment options for Schitzophrenia.
@manchester26m This conversation is three months old dude, I can't even remember what the discussion was about. ;)
With respect to my last question, I gave the parameters of the scenario - would you kill me?
The point I was making is that in a scenario like that, there are no materialistic prohibitions against cold blooded murder. If you don't kill me, you're doing so by assuming the intrinsic worth of human beings - an ad-hoc, arbitrary value judgement that is hanging on nothing on atheism.
Take their food out, and in a couple of weeks time, there will only be one rat left.
We share a trait in that we are also social animals. We make friends and cooperate. Without this synergy we would not have come down from the trees and would instead be sole survivors who can only breed through rape.
Now, give us motivation, competition for food in a wasteland and we are animals.
Do you own a dog? If there was a situation where you had the ability to save either a human stranger from certain doom, or your dog, which would you choose?
Which holds more 'value', the human or your loyal companion? And why?
You will get two different answers on this one yet which is 'right'?
@manchester26m On atheism, why should I choose to save either? You can no more condemn me for sitting back and watching both the person and the dog suffer than if I acted "heroically" and struggled to save them.
Don't confuse objective morality with situational ethics - just because an extreme situation demands a less than ideal moral judgement, doesn't mean objective morality doesn't exist; on the contrary, we typically make the "best" judgements we can even under such circumstances.
@manchester26m Also observe that you're pre-supposing the truth of atheism, a-biogenesis and full macro-evolution in your statements.
Even if you accept macro-evolution, that's only descriptive of the past - it doesn't prescribe present or future morality, does it?
I submit that if you weren't already committed to these ideologies, then you wouldn't have to explain away the sense of objective morality each of us feel, any more than you have to explain away any other sense experience.
@ScottyVOR There is no all encompassing objective morality. Take underage sex for example. In the USA, 18 is the age of consent. In some countries it is much lower or occasionally there is none. In the UK it is 16, Denmark 14 so even closely related societies greatly on what is acceptable.
@ScottyVOR You dont HAVE to save either. But if you refuse to act, expect to be shunned.
You are under the impression that Atheism means "Why should I? Whats the point?" but as I have pointed out, we are social animals, descendants of social animals. Synergy works very well for us. If we were solitary hunters then bumping off the competition would be beneficial in terms of gaining territory, females and food - But this sort of hunter doesnt get to kill the mammoth. The one with friends does.
@manchester26m Atheism certainly does mean a re-assessment of morality to the level of "Why should I?", I see no reason why it shouldn't. As Dawkins points out, we alone can rebel against our genetics, for good or ill. If your sense of morality gets in the way of my desires, why shouldn't I remove you?
The great contradiction of atheism is that no one can truly live this way. Take Dawkins - he affirms there's no such thing as good or evil, then elsewhere condemns religion as wrong and evil.
@manchester26m As for your questions, surely you see they don't even touch the issue of whether morality is objective or not. All they show is that morality can be difficult at times and/or people have a fallible comprehension of such morality.
Don't fall into the trap of thinking objective morality is a rigid, inflexible set of orders, it's not - ultimately it's an attitude. As Jesus said in Mt 22 (paraphrasing) "Love God and love your neighbour. For the whole Law hangs on these two commands".
So 2 men having sex is seen in Christianity as sinmply being amongst the spectrum of morality? In which case how does one define this? In Christianity, does anything go as long as it has the right attitude? What is the right attitude? Who has it and how is it defined?
As long as you love God does anything go? Is any behavior permissible?
My questions do not touch on objective morality because there is none. My examples illustrate that.
@ScottyVOR So the only reason you yourself do not morder indiscriminately is because some invisible fella is watching over you and deciding whether you go to a nice fluffy place of a horrific how place?
Its a good job you believe in a God then eh or everyone else in your neighborhood would be in grave danger!
Why shouldnt you remove someone who gets in your way? Answer - Because there are better alternatives. The great irony is that God fearing Christians are the biggest offenders here.
@manchester26m No, "REAL" morality is based in an attitude that reflects Gods own nature, and that attitude will have a logical outworking. If I love my neighbour, I won't murder...or steal, or cheat, etc. If I love God, I will have respect for His creation, and His created order (male and female, etc). It's not "anything goes" - that should be axiomatic. If a moral dilemma/difficultly is faced, where no options are totally good, then the "Greater Good" principle helps solve the issue.
@manchester26m The reason I don't murder is because there's a logical and intrinsic worth to human beings as being made in the image of God (even those people I don't particularly like). On atheism no such value exists except as an arbitrary cultural throw-back to the Christian principles of yesteryear (in the West, anyway). We could equally adopt Stalins low view of humanity, and be no more "evil" for it. We are, after all, just re-arranged pond scum...and who values pond scum?
@ScottyVOR Intrinsic worth of human beings? You do realise this is a very recent development dont you? Shall we delve into the Bible to see what is says about slavery? How about being raped? How about what you should do with wayward children? Come on man, you dont base your morality on the words of God any more than I do. Humans do have value, the difference is that that value is mutable depending on the circumstances. i.e. not many tears are shed for dead Iraqi's but lots are shed for Americans
@ScottyVOR Right, so a greater good principle exists. So thanks for admitting that there is no all powerful all encompassing right and wrong. You accept that there are no moral absolutes and that every case has its own merits. You must therefore agree than no person has exactly the same moral code as another since the threshold to kill, steal, lie is different with everyone and that the situation dictates the actions to take - i.e. whats your motivation, which is what I have been saying.
@manchester26m Did you even read my past posts? I've been arguing for objective morality, not some wooden "moral absolutism" - if this misunderstanding is the root of our debate then it's easily resolved, for I and every objective moralist agree that, as you say, "every case has it's own merits".
My point has been far deeper: that the basic values such as love, charity and respect find their grounding in the very nature of God, and as such are external to us and objectively true/good.
@manchester26m The atheist cannot say this, for as you note, "no person has the same moral code". One person subjectively values human life, the next is a murderer, the next a racist - who's "right"? On atheism even the question is absurd, for such values are delusory in the first place.
The question is: what reasons do we have for thinking morality to be a subjective delusion in direct opposition to our immediate experience and intuitions? Certainly nothing you've mentioned so far.
I knew you wouldn't answer the question! Why do you try to dance around my question? Just answer it! if your god told you to kill me, would you? If you won't be honest then we have nothing more to talk about! So, "yes or no", would you kill me?
@99minerkc Reduced to attempted "gotcha" questions are you? I gave you more credit than that dude...shame.
The question only examines the aspect of my personal obedience anyway, not God's morality. If God did command me to kill you, it would be for morally sufficient reasons that you yourself would recognise and agree with.
Now answer my question; would anything stop you from killing me if you had both the will and the opportunity?
@ScottyVOR You still just cannot bring yourself to answer a simple question! I'm done with you as you're disingenuous as far as I'm concerned! To be honest, I don't know why I went this far given that a personal god doesn't exist(in my opinion), but I guess I want to see what kind of theist you were. I think I've seen enough!! I won't be reading any more of your responses as I've wasted enough time!! I'll end by saying, of course you would kill me if your god said to immoral as it would be!!
@99minerkc Have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or no? It's a loaded question that can't be given a "simple yes/no", and you know it.
If anything you show yourself as disingenuous by avoiding my (multiple) questions. When you've grown up a little and actually engage your position, instead of just childishly throwing stones, then maybe we can talk.
(BTW almost every sentence you've ended with exclamation marks. Overkill maybe?)
@99minerkc stop doubting fam, seek God for yourself, Tim is just a man, how do you expect him to explain the spiritual? What reason do you want him to give for proven faith? Read the Bible and I'm pretty sure you'll find the answer to this question, cos I have
OR, Mr. Keller... "God" is a man made concept and he is 'hidden' from us because it only exists as an imaginary idea....
TheGizmoskate 3 weeks ago
"I don't know". Perhaps the most humane, softening and respectable thing I've heard a Christian say. If he only had stopped there.
DrHowbeit 4 months ago 2
He loved Job so much he killed his whole family, sure he gave him another one, but maybe Job would have like to have kept his first family, but the members of Jobs first family were just pawns in a bet that God had with the Devil, the Job story would sugest we are all nothing but pawn in a game created by a God who stacks the rules against us, what kind of a father would treat his children as nothing but pawns.
JWeed83 4 months ago
Answer: "I dunno lul!" *Make shit up*
Anyone who's actually read Job ought to recognize that the Christian God is a cowardly asshole. Unfortunately, a large portion of Christianity is dedicated to ignoring obvious character flaws.
wonkavsn 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
God is not hidden!
MrDavidcole 4 months ago
Comment removed
MrDavidcole 4 months ago
God is as hidden as a thought.
And as clear as an idea.
As obvious as intuition.
God is a subtle motivator, not a dictator.
jonesgerard 5 months ago
I believe that if we are to be in God's image, we cannot be happy to see His creation suffer, so we must forgive and trust that God is just. That means that we must not be judgmental, however difficult that may be. As only God can know whether a person deserves forgiveness or not, so we must leave it to him and become as a child. We are told to forgive as we would be forgiven, however difficult that may be, which is the opposite of revenge. I am not saying this as one who has not suffered.
CinderellaDragon 6 months ago
At least he's honest here; religions do not know, they believe, they have faith. In what? A book. Please. Not many will sit still for that anymore.
We are in a growing phase where one life leads to another; we should not fear judgement at this stage. We were presumably just "hatched"; ch. talk about being judged and having to worry about going to hell? Fear rules people in religion. Don't believe, go to hell forever. Think people.
rovingdesertfox 7 months ago
@rovingdesertfox Those who don't beleive don't go to hell.
I had no faith, then I had an experience with God,
now have faith buts its experiential faith, not blind faith.
Anyone can experience God but most would rather die than fullfil the requirements to abandon self, many kill themselves rather than let go of ego.
You can't save both your face and your butt.
jonesgerard 5 months ago
@jonesgerard You may not "believe" that those who don't believe go to hell, I'm just quoting ch. theology. And, just to play devil's advocate, how do YOU know they don't go to hell? When you start playing the dogmatic game and belong to a belief system, you have to stay within the rules set up for you. What you call experiencing god is certainly not the highest intelligence of any existence. You may have had some sort of experience, and say you have faith in that feeling, cont.
rovingdesertfox 5 months ago
@rovingdesertfox Its an untrue and incorrect quote, non believers don't go to hell, not knowing is not a mortal sin. I know they don't go to hell because it wouldn't make sense.
You don't know what I have experienced so you're guessing and you are limited to opinion, not experience.
Atheism is a form of truth seeking, thats not a sin.
It cannot be evil to ask "give me proof".
Futile yes.
jonesgerard 5 months ago
@jonesgerard I think the whole paradigm of sin and no sin is ridiculous. Our souls come here to experience in this body on this planet. When we die we move on, review our life here and then go somewhere else to learn more. I didn't experience what you experienced, but how is it you KNOW you experienced "God"? From my understanding there are many dimensions and many beings who have the power to appear in any form they wish to impress those who cannot tell the difference. How do you know?
rovingdesertfox 5 months ago
@rovingdesertfox My definition of sin is "that which seperates (causes seperation) me from God".
Not knowing God or about God doesn't cause seperation, my pushing God out does.
That takes concerted action on my part.
Having a conscious contact with God is unmistakable, theres no mistaking it for an LSD flashback or whatever. But for me it was also easy to miss because it was so subtle, all I saw was the result and realized my mind had changed fundamentally.
jonesgerard 5 months ago
@jonesgerard Are 'you" your body or the soul/essence/spirit in your body? If your soul/essence/spirit, then you cannot be separated from God. We take a drink of forgetfullness coming into this world, so that we can experience life here without remembering that we are actually a part of God. (I 'awoke' about 20 yrs. ago to all of the unreality here on earth, and could see through that which was not real, but I wouldn't say I had conscious contact with God.)
rovingdesertfox 5 months ago
@jonesgerard Are 'you" your body or the soul/essence/spirit in your body? If your soul/essence/spirit, then you cannot be separated from God. We take a drink of forgetfullness coming into this world, so that we can experience life here without remembering that we are actually a part of God. (I 'awoke' about 20 yrs. ago to all of the unreality here on earth, and could see through that which was not real, but I wouldn't say I had conscious contact with God.)
rovingdesertfox 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jonesgerard Are 'you" your body or the soul/essence/spirit in your body? If your soul/essence/spirit, then you cannot be separated from God. We take a drink of forgetfullness coming into this world, so that we can experience life here without remembering that we are actually a part of God. (I 'awoke' about 20 yrs. ago to all of the unreality here on earth, and could see through that which was not real, but I wouldn't say I had conscious contact with God.)
rovingdesertfox 5 months ago
@jonesgerard but there is NO way ANYONE has experienced the top dog. You are on your own path and are learning at your own pace, as is everyone. The ego is given to us to use in this 3d world. It does not have to be abandoned. Btw, I'm not saying there is no god, just that the god of the bible and the religions is not the top guy. Check out astro-theology, by Jordan Maxwell or Santos Bonacci to see where the big three religions came from. It's all based on control over the masses.
rovingdesertfox 5 months ago
@rovingdesertfox I was raised catholic, became atheist but had a conscious experience with God and my life was changed. It happens.
jonesgerard 5 months ago
@jonesgerard Again I will ask, how do you know it was God? There are many entities in dimensions above ours who delight in deceiving man. Surely you must understand that. I would go so far as to say no one on earth has the capability to identify contact with any entity in a form higher than the physical, unless you have gone out of body and are versed in the workings of the spirit world. And if you are, we would all love to hear more about what it's like. A feeling is not a fact.
rovingdesertfox 5 months ago
@rovingdesertfox I know it was God because I had to work Gods will ( not mine) to get the result.
I followed the 12 steps of AA and the result was exactly as I was promised.
The obsessions disappeared, the insanity melted away, the fundamental fear vanished.
The problem was removed, its gone.
I don't know about the spirit world, I know theres a conscious entity in my mind that will kill me if given the chance and without God I have no defense. So I'm no saint.
jonesgerard 5 months ago
@jonesgerard I worked the program also, but only when I left it did I get rid of my addiction. If I would say God was part of that paradigm, then God healed me, but I don't attribute my turn around to God, just to a maturation process.
rovingdesertfox 5 months ago
@rovingdesertfox Then you didn't work the program did you?
I know this because when worked as laid out it cannot 'not work' .
And I know from experience of fiddling around with it myself for a while before getting down to brass tacks, half measures yielded zero results.
If you recovered some other way, write it down and give it away, the world could use it.
jonesgerard 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rovingdesertfox Then you didn't work the program did you?
I know this because when worked as laid out it cannot 'not work' .
And I know from experience of fiddling around with it myself for a while before getting down to brass tacks, half measures yielded zero results.
If you recovered some other way, write it down and give it away, the world could use it.
jonesgerard 5 months ago
@rovingdesertfox Well its still good news, keep it going.
jonesgerard 5 months ago
wwwdotExposingChristianitydotcom
GahdeMalprigi1488x 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GahdeMalprigi1488x "wwwdotExposingChristianitydotcom"
Try givit-a -restdotcom
Get on with living, no-one give a crap about religion.
Religion isn't God, its just about God.
No-one needs a middleman.
jonesgerard 5 months ago
@awakeningaletheia Are you a Jehovah's withness by any chance? I feel like I've heard you speak before. I am a child of God now and will spend the rest of my life getting to know the ultimate father. In the garden, God created us to LOVE us. Your comment about a merciful God is a little rose tinted. God is merciful, he is also just. Again I am only human, I spend my time learning about God and having a relationship with him, everything else is secondary. Thank you for being polite :)
OmoItsekiri 10 months ago
@OmoItsekiri I am glad to hear that you don't care what the church in the past thought, for I would completely agree with you that we must base everything on sound scripture. Ha no I am not a Jehovah's Witness and I never plan on being one. Yes our ultimate purpose of ever being created was to share in our Father's love and innumerable attributes. I am not in lala land about God's judgments either, he will punish the wicked, scripture makes that clear. Continue to study and learn of Jesus.
awakeningaletheia 10 months ago
@OmoItsekiri God is merciful and just, not merciful but just. You see in the church we have a bad habit of making it seem like his mercy and justice are separate entities. However I would scripturally say that Love is his defining attribute, and that everything is driven by this love. His justice is driven by his love and so his anger lasts but a moment and his mercy is new everyday (Psalm 30:5, Lam 3:22-23). Understanding God we then understand how he is just, and not vengeful but corrective
awakeningaletheia 10 months ago
@OmoItsekiri P.S. Eternal punishment affects everyone, for we are to love even out enemies. If we love all then seeing anyone in torment will mentally torment us. That is if we truly have the love of God is us. The love of God is not wimpy as some have tried to imply, it is a flame of fire that is stronger than the grave. His jealousy is connected to his love, everything comes back to love in the end.
awakeningaletheia 10 months ago
@awakeningaletheia 'I will wipe away every tear from their eyes...' I do not believe I will be tormented by knowing people are in hell, you can not say that for sure. I of course won't enjoy it, but I will not suffer for it, not even mentally. If you make your choice, then that's that. But I respect your point of view.
OmoItsekiri 10 months ago
There would be NO suffering IF mankind did not ever sin.
UmaBlinky 11 months ago
Oh isn't it so convenient that God is hidden, it's almost like he never existed in the first place...
truckcompany 1 year ago
It is absolute BULLSHIT to say that this God is Hidden because it is part of the suffering of Sin.
The very thing which brought about what is called Original Sin is FREEWILL!
The Knowledge of Good & Evil!
Without the Knowledge of Good & Evil it is impossible to have freewill!
So the very thing Christian's claim their God gave us is the very thing which we are condemned for having!
And this God refuses to make itself known because that is part of the Suffering?
What a load of BULLSHIT
MrGoodNKinky 1 year ago
@MrGoodNKinky To clarify, God didn't force the knowledge of 'good and and evil' on anyone. The choice for Adam and Eve was to eat that 1 fruit or every other in the garden. THEY chose 'the knowledge of good and evil'. Please read the account, then state your point.
OmoItsekiri 1 year ago
@OmoItsekiri
i am fully aware of that fantasy story.
What you fail to realize is the ability to comprehend good and evil Can NOT come from eating Anything!
It is a byproduct of the higher Brain!
Animals do not have the ability to know the difference between good and evil because their brains are not developed enough.
All animals have is Stimulus response!
However the ability to know good and evil (To make a Choice) is called FREEWILL!
Freewill & Sin are the same damn thing!
MrGoodNKinky 1 year ago
@MrGoodNKinky Hi. Adam and Eve had 'Free will' before the fall, therefore sin is not the same as free will. the knowledge of good and evil was distinct from free will. It may very well have been the rebellion against God BY eating the fruit. Not so much the fruit (or the knowledge of good and evil) itself, but the decision to eat inspite of the warning not to. How do you know animals do not have SOME understanding of good and evil? Justing saying, how much proof it there of that really?
OmoItsekiri 1 year ago
@OmoItsekiri
Clearly you do not grasp what it means to KNOW something.
If they didn't KNOW what good and evil were then it is impossible for them to make a choice between them.
It would be like telling you to make a choice between ,dfkashn and hjogflsd;le.
Since you would have no conception of what either are then there is no way for you to make a choice between them.
All you could do is pick one and hope for the best!
I really hate idiots!
MrGoodNKinky 11 months ago
@MrGoodNKinky The knowledge of good and evil is not sin, because God has knowledge of good and evil. The sin was to disobey God, which in the end only led too the currrent miserable state of the world in general, it was for our own good. I don't believe I have said or done anything to warrant you calling me an idiot, that's hurtful. I strongly dislike talking to people with no manners, but I won't go down the road of insulting you.
OmoItsekiri 11 months ago
@OmoItsekiri
The way to know that animals do not know good from evil is looking at what they do and how they act.
Animals respond to stimulus this is a known fact!
There is also the fact that good and evil are also largely subjective concepts.
To a fundimentalist Christian beating a child may be viewed as good.
To Normal people this is evil.
To normal people threats of torture if you do not THINK as someone demands is EVIL.
To the Christian it is the message of JESUS!
MrGoodNKinky 11 months ago
@MrGoodNKinky Animals have been out in situations where they have chosen to do good or evil. I do not think there is enough scientific evidence against it. The christian message is 'for God loved the world so much that he gave his only begotten son, that who so ever believes in him shall not perish, but have everlasting life'. The old testament is a result of eating the fruit, only God is able to be above the law, but by not listening Adam and Eve made us subject to it.
OmoItsekiri 11 months ago
@OmoItsekiri
Explain how Sin and Freewill are different given the definition of both is the same!
SIN is disobedience to the will of God!
FREEWILL is the ability to make your own choices.
If your So Called Freewill doesn't match what this God wants then it is be definition SIN.
To claim people have freewill then demand they use that freewill as you say is EVIL!
That is HITLER like behavior!
It is no different then a rapest saying to a woman have sex with me or be set on fire!
MrGoodNKinky 11 months ago
@MrGoodNKinky Is the law evil? Is it wrong for the law to say do not kill, steal, envy etc? Are you for real? Thats your arguement? Be reasonable it's not the same. I'm not even going to try to address this point.
OmoItsekiri 11 months ago
@OmoItsekiri
That rapest is giving the woman two choices.
One is the rapest will the other is the "Punishment" (As Christian's term it) for not making the choice the rapest wants.
Which means you worship a being that is no different then a Rapest!
The same type example can be used for a man that beats his wife, abuses his children, molests children.
The Do as I say or be tortured is nothing short of Pure EVIL!
And YOU PRAISE THAT BEHAVIOR!
You are sick!
MrGoodNKinky 11 months ago
@MrGoodNKinky The punishment, as the bible terms it, is eternal separation from God, CHOSEN by people. You seem to be speaking out of pain. I'm not sure that if you ever read the bible, you understood what it was saying. If you were a spoon fed Christian who didn't know God personally, I'm not surprised at your current plight. I'm sorry if you encountered religious people instead of real Christians. I suggest you separate the 2 and stop generalising and lying about what you don't know. Goodbye.
OmoItsekiri 11 months ago
@OmoItsekiri
This seperation of God idea is rather funny given you fuckers also claim your God is Omnipotient (EVERYWHERE) So which is it idiot?
IF your God is EVERYWHERE exactly HOW THE FUCK can anyone be SEPERATE FROM THIS GOD THING?
Secondly REVELATION 14:10 he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:
IN THE PRESENCE OF THE LAMB!
EXACTLY HOW ASSHOLE IS THIS SEPERATION FROM?
MrGoodNKinky 11 months ago
@MrGoodNKinky You are really funny, I will not be speaking to you anymore. I only speak to people who have the curtesy to speak to me as I do them. You are only interested in arguing, so I can't be bothered. Goodbye, God speed :)
OmoItsekiri 11 months ago
@OmoItsekiri
In short you only talk to those that buy into your contradictating bullshit.
And to correct myself the omni was present. lmao.
The truth is I was honestlyh pointing out exactly why this seperation idea is Chruch Dogma NOT what the bible says.
It would be no different from claiming The Incredible Hulk can fly when the story that was written about that chracter clearly establishes he can't,
MrGoodNKinky 11 months ago
@OmoItsekiri My friend MrGoodNKindky has a point, while he may have presented it rudely it still has credence. the Bible (as far as the English translations are concerned) does not teach eternal separation but eternal punishment and destruction (this all based off of 5-10 verses out of about 1000 pages of the Bible). Sure you can say weeping, gnashing teeth, perishing, and death all mean eternal punishment, but that is reading into the text something that is just not there.
awakeningaletheia 10 months ago
@awakeningaletheia Hi, It may be eternal punishment, or ceasing to exist 'like chaff burnt in flames' psalms 1. If God is not in hell and whoever goes there is there for all eternity, you can deduce eternal separation from God. It is for those who reject God an therefore all that is of him
OmoItsekiri 10 months ago
@OmoItsekiri According to Psalm 139 God is in hell, for he is omnipresent. There cannot be eternal separation
awakeningaletheia 10 months ago
@awakeningaletheia Hell is for those who chose to live apart from God (therefore everything of and related to him), he respects that choice. I won't go on about this, I do not like to argue unnecessarily. I simply wanted your friend to Judge the book not the people who claim to follow and understand it without actually doing so. Read the whole bible, don't just pick up quotes here and there. You have to see the origins of the account, why and how it reaches certain conclusions.
OmoItsekiri 10 months ago
@OmoItsekiri I don't like needless debate either, but all of of scripture is clear on this.
Revelation 14:9-10
If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand...he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.
2 Thess 1:9
They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction that comes from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might (ESV alternate rendering)
awakeningaletheia 10 months ago
@awakeningaletheia I don't understand. Are you saying God will be IN hell? 1 can live apart from God, he is present yet not in sense. Hell, is the second death Christ died and rose to save us from. People in the new earth will live WITH God in his presence, while those in hell won't. The bible mentions God's presence leaving people, places. I believe 'Omnipresence' refers to God's ability to be everywhere, but it does not limit his ability to remove his presence from an area.
OmoItsekiri 10 months ago
@OmoItsekiri You do understand that the idea of eternal separation is a fairly new doctrine right (about 100 years old). The church in centuries past thought that Hell was a place where God reigned his wrath on the ungodly for all eternity, he was the tormentor not the devil, this is easily proven by seeing that Satan is tormented in hell, if he is tormented then how can he torment? There is an intimate presence of God and an omnipresence, God is in hell according to tradition
awakeningaletheia 10 months ago
@awakeningaletheia Quote me on this I never said satan would torment, he is suffering too and everyone he tricked into turning away from God. What the 'Church' thought is not the point, it is what is in the bible. If you mean the catholics, I am not catholic and it wasn't the only denomination that existed, we have more history about it. People will have different interpretations. I think we can agree hell is not a great place to be in, that is the material point.
OmoItsekiri 10 months ago
@OmoItsekiri Of course I believe in neither view of hell, for they make God out to be less merciful and loving than he really is. I ask you to ponder what the second death is, don't assume that it is eternal torment. The first death is the one that came through Adam, a physical death. What is the second death? What is the thing that conquers Death and Hell, for the Lake of Fire destroys them does it not? What is the Lake of Fire?
awakeningaletheia 10 months ago
@awakeningaletheia Moses asked what his name was, reply 'I am that I am'. Human language can't contain him. Your definition of God is never going to be accurate, you can't fully understand people how can you understand the intelligence that created them? I think I mentioned, there is is a belief in eternal torment and also complete destruction (being ceasing to exist). I don't concentrate on that, it doesn't apply to me. I'm not planning on going so I try to find out more about the other place.
OmoItsekiri 10 months ago
@OmoItsekiri According to Psalm 139 God is in hell, for he is omnipresent. There cannot be eternal separation if he is everywhere.
awakeningaletheia 10 months ago
What an honest answer. I like this guy.
BrooklynRagtag 1 year ago
@BrooklynRagtag definitely
UnrealHelix 1 year ago
That is what he thinks. And God should be all powerfull, so he should be able to come here. Also he came around a lot in the Bible, why is it part of the suffering now and not back then. Also, why not appear to ancient cultures where there were humansacrafices to weather Gods and Gods of war and so on? That is what I'd like to know.
welme23 1 year ago
Well answered, but part of it I would say is because he really wants us to search and desire him more.
therexCo 2 years ago
@therexCo , He really wants us to search? Kind of like an easter egg hunt! Pretty warped if you ask me! No, It would make more sense to reveal himself like he did in the bible, say like with Moses! After he revealed himself in a loving caring way most people would want more without a doubt, and those who still rejected him, well, their loss!
99minerkc 1 year ago
@99minerkc You think? I'm not so sure myself...you mention Moses, yet when Moses was on Sinai for only 40 days the people turned and started worshipping the golden calf. These were the same people who were just delivered from Egypt by God himself, and still they turn on Him.
I'd be inclined to think that if God were actually more direct, people would then be complaining that He's too forceful; complaining that they''d at least like a choice. Just a thought anyway...
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR If you read my entire post I said that some would reject him and it would be their loss! No, people wouldn't say he would be too forceful IF this god is truly ALL loving and ALL powerful! Think about the level of love people would be experiencing! Nothing like anyone has ever experienced ever before! The love would envelope the people who he revealed himself to! People forget aboult that!
99minerkc 1 year ago
@99minerkc Isn't that the world we find ourselves in though? Some people reject Him and it's their loss, and some accept and it's to their gain. The "enveloping love" you talk about is experienced by many - if you have time watch the Faisal Malick or Ian McCormack interviews, both on my channel - immense love there.
Remember love is a two-way thing - it must be both given and received voluntarily. To be voluntary, you must want it in the first place...seeking is the outward sign of wanting.
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR Sorry your comment doesn't fly! As I said, many, many more would believe if your god(if he existed)revealed himself! Why would a god hide in the closet when he could save the vast majority of his creation? He wouldn't! By the way, why is your god so hung up with sacrifices? They're throughout the OT and then you have jesus in the NT! (continued)
99minerkc 1 year ago
continued here: a true loving god would never punish all his creation for a screw up that Adam/eve did(and he set them up). No, a truly loving god would simply have forgiven them, period OR would have thought up a more loving way of forgiveness than his PATHETIC vicarious redemption! I'm more moral that your god(again, if he exists)!! There's nothing you could possibly offer me from your religion! I find it repulsive and wicked!! I'm just sorry that so many of you live as slaves!!
99minerkc 1 year ago
@99minerkc Slow down dude, you're bringing in a whole host of other subjects. First: you keep talking about a "loving" God, almost in a soppy, emotional way. God isn't that one dimensional - His love and mercy are certainly there, but so is absolute holiness and justice. There is a tension within God that any parent can appreciate - does He show mercy and not punish wilful wrong doing, or act justly and deliver the punishment people deserve? In fact His justice stems from His goodness. (cont)
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
(cont) Secondly: you seem to be expressing moral outrage about God's behaviour. Yet if God doesn't exist, objective morality doesn't exist (most atheist philosophers agree with this). When you label Christianity as "wicked" you're appealing to an objective morality than no longer exists; everything has become relative. Nothing is truly wrong on atheism...not God, not Christianity, not genocide, not rape, etc. All you're saying is that you personally dislike something, but it can never be wrong.
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR Oh, also, I never said I was atheist! My guess is you "assume" that I am! Sorry for disappointing you!
99minerkc 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR It's funny how you seem to have god all figured out at least "your version" of what a god should be by "your" standards! Other people's version(definition)of a god will look totally different! That's what makes your god so very, very man made! Put your god on a scale and you have an entire spectrum to choose from! Sorry but a god should not be able to have so many variations, at least in my opinion!
I did watch the vids on your channel and found them entertaining! Thanks for re
99minerkc 1 year ago
@99minerkc Sorry dude, I did assume there. Just out of interest, what would you call yourself?
As for "my version" of God, that's just the basic Judeo-Christian God. I didn't invent Him. :P
If God does exist, He must exist with certain attributes, such that there are right and wrong propositions about Him. Everyone can't be right, because many claims about the nature of God contradict each another. The existence of counterfeit money doesn't effect the existence of the genuine currency, right?
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR the god I see is "not" a personal god who watches your every move, who care what position you have sex in, who gets jealous, who punishes it's creation via suffering for an eternity, never ending, just simply because one can't wrap their head around and accept the concept of a personal god! What I see as a god(if you need to call it a god)is the same as Albert Einsteins.
99minerkc 1 year ago
@99minerkc Oh...you're more Deistic? This "higher power" is so far above all this messy stuff down here, right?
You mind helping me out with a few questions? Would you say he/it created the Universe? Is he/it personal? Does he/it care how we live (morally, if there is such a thing)? Cheers, I'm genuinely interested in how you answer these.
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR I already answered your questions except the morality one! Re- that one I'm likely more moral than most theists given that I abide by the laws "MAN" created(I have never been arrested)! Also, man kind survived long before your religion was born, so where did their sense of morality come from?
Name one moral deed a christian can do that a non-believer can't do! On the other hand. On the other hand how long does it take to think of an evil deed a christian has done in god's name??
99minerkc 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR yes, a supreme intelligence may have created the universe, who knows for sure though? Nobody!
99minerkc 1 year ago
@99minerkc Slow down bud, lets take one issue at a time. Re morality, if you believe in a deistic god that's far removed from us, then why should he care how we behave? You face the same problem as atheists; namely you have no objective grounds for right or wrong. If someone punches you in the face unprovoked, you don't like it (obviously), but you can't say he "shouldn't" have done so because that's appealing to an objective standard that can't/doesn't exist on your worldview. (cont)
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
(cont) As for some Christians being immoral...so what? There are hypocrites everywhere, and they will be judged as such, but that doesn't impugn the actual teaching of the NT.
Moral non-believers? Sure there are - there are plenty of them. Humans are designed by God as moral creatures with conscience, and live their lives discovering morality (to differing degrees of clarity). The point is that a personal God is required for morality to exist at all, not that non-believers can't be moral.
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR As we know man has been in tribes(groups)and somewhat civilized for at least 100,000 yrs and god did nothing, no intervention and mankind did fine! Then for some reason between 3-6 thousand years ago your god decides it's time to intervene?(lol). So before your god jumped in man created their own laws like what we have today! We CLEARLY do not need intervention from a god who advocates genocide, rape, murder, incest, and slavery! continued:
99minerkc 1 year ago
continued here: Again I will ask(in case you missed the first time I stated this), "Name one moral deed a christian can do that a non-believer can't do! On the other hand how long does it take to think of an evil(non-moral) deed a christian has done in god's name??"
99minerkc 1 year ago
@99minerkc "‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment." - Jesus.
I've yet to see a non-believer do that one. As for evil done in that name of God, see my last comment on hypocrites - you seem to have missed what I said.
As for the length of time, you are aware the forgiveness of the cross is retroactive? Abraham, Moses, etc were all right with God by looking forward to Jesus, just as we look back.
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR IF a non-believer chose to love your god they could do it! So, you still cannot say that there's a single moral thing a non believer can't do that a believer can! Your comment that forgiveness is retroactive is a lame attempt to justify that all people need redemption! Your belief that all need your god to be moral is lame too! All people living prior to the foundation(discovery?)of your religion lived both immoral and moral lives WITHOUT your god's objective morality! (cont:)
99minerkc 1 year ago
cont here: It's only "your opinion" that your god instilled his sense of morality in people's conscience, you have absolutely no proof that such a thing happened!! I like to think that people evolved over time! "They learned from their mistakes!"
99minerkc 1 year ago
@99minerkc ...Huh? If a non-believer chooses to love God then he must believe He exists, thus becoming a believer. You can't love nothing. A non-believer cannot love God, and thus cannot be completely moral (it's the "greatest commandment" for Pete's sake!).
I don't think you're grasping the full weight of the morality thing dude. If a personal God doesn't exist, objective morality doesn't exist. If objective morality doesn't exist then no one, believer or not, can be truly moral (cont).
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
(cont) Why? Because the objective standard by which we judge good and evil has been removed. Everything is reduced to subjectivity; personal taste. Being a baby rapist might be socially unfashionable, but it's not really wrong, and no one can tell him he shouldn't do it (why is your opinion better than his?). Why shouldn't the murderer murder? It's not like humanity is (or should be) going anywhere.
Think hard now - do you think we apprehend objective morality?
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR Are you kidding me? Do you really think our justice system is built on your god's laws? Not a chance!! Just because a bible is used to swear people in does not mean anything more than that!!! Our country is anything but a christian nation other than lip service and you know it! That being the case, the system is quite secular and it works, is it perfect? Far from it but it does work! As far as I'm concerned it can be an objective or subjective system so long as it works!!!
99minerkc 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR So what did you think of the video? "The 6 Moral Dealbreakers of Christianity"
99minerkc 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR yes, they would become a believer, the point I'm making is that if they chose to they could do it, but I agree with you that they likely wouldn't do so! I'm not sure that objective morality doesn't exist without a god, but it doesn't matter! As I said in another post, mankind did fine for centuries before your religion was born, and it continues to work today, it isn't perfect, but it works! cont:
99minerkc 1 year ago
continued here: Denmark, an atheist country has a lower crime rate than the USA! Statistics show that atheist countries in general have lower crime rates than theist countries! Is a god needed? Not at all! Will there ever be a time when our world is without religion? I doubt it but one can hope!
99minerkc 1 year ago
@99minerkc Is a serial rapist wrong for what he does?
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR Here's a you tube video you may be interested in: "The 6 Moral Dealbreakers of Christianity" that gem is from ZJemptv
99minerkc 1 year ago
@99minerkc Thanks, just watched it. Usual high school level arguments that abound on the net, but oh well. Hope you saw the response by Buruc. :P
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR I want to know "your" response. So, is all you have to say is that it was high school level arguments? Also, who is Bruce P.? I missed him?
99minerkc 1 year ago
@99minerkc By high school level arguments, I mean they really aren't sophisticated or even well thought out, yet they continue to make the rounds on Youtube in spite of strong Christian rebuttals in the philosophical & theological world. I'm surprised you listed it here to be honest - you'll be quoting Richard "call me a Bright" Dawkins next.
Buruc did a video response to ZJ, thought you might have seen it is all.
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR Well, I don't think that you're getting the point that I'm trying to make to you! I'm not suggesting that we get into an intellectual discussion on morality! For me anyway, basic common sense(call it HS level arguments if you need to)is sufficient! Here is another video which sums up what I believe here and it's entitled: "Hitchens on morality"
You can't say Hitchens, one of the top 100 intellectuals, has HS arguments so please watch. thanks.
99minerkc 1 year ago
@99minerkc Ignoring his usual straw-manning of the theist position, Hitchens is fighting from atheism, an incredibly intellectually compromised position. You'll notice he has to assume values like "human solidarity" and "getting on", without telling us why an individual should value such things. On atheism, why shouldn't the "psychopath" he refers to indulge in murder? Everyone is going to die anyway...why should we assume living is a good thing? Why is your subjective view better than mine?
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
BTW, Hitchens is one of the top 100 intellectuals? Your kidding right? Out of interest, what list are you using?
I did enjoy his debate with William Lane Craig though. If you haven't seen it do watch it, he gets absolutely destroyed by Craig. Even the atheist sites I frequent said as much.
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR Well, for starts I'll ask you this question: If your god spoke to you and said in a crystal clear manner to you, "I want you to kill kc". Of course you'll justify my comment by saying your god would never ask you to do that! Forget that come back as you cannot assume what your god wants or doesn't want! So, back to the question, would you kill me in your god's name if he commanded you to?
99minerkc 1 year ago
@99minerkc I think you recognise the weakness in the question, namely that He wouldn't ask such a thing. As such the point is moot. The only except in history was when, after 400 years of waiting for them to change, he used the Israelite army as the tool of His judgement on the sick and depraved Canaanite tribes (practising child sacrifice, bestiality, etc). Later when Israel became just as bad He did the same against them - using the Assyrians and Babylonians to impartially judge Israel.
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
I have a question for you. If both you and I were alone in some rural area, and you held intense hatred against me for some reason, would you kill me? Say that you knew for sure you could get away with it, and you had the will to kill me, would you? Would anything stop you?
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR I can answer this one.
If I met you in the street, I would be more likely to engage with you in friendly conversation, potentially befriending you.
However, if the situation were deperate enough, I would be capable of utilising you for nourishment - and no, if we got to that point (maybe in a life boat for weeks or months) then nothing in the universe would dissuade me. It'd be you or me.
But of course, this isnt an every day occurance and the situation would be extreme.
manchester26m 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR I dont think hatred would be enough. Its far less effort and danger to just keep away from you, but if you pose a threat or a danger to me or those who I love, then sure - I'd do you.
It wouldnt be because my imaginary friend ordered me to do so. If that were the case I'd be looking at treatment options for Schitzophrenia.
manchester26m 1 year ago
@manchester26m This conversation is three months old dude, I can't even remember what the discussion was about. ;)
With respect to my last question, I gave the parameters of the scenario - would you kill me?
The point I was making is that in a scenario like that, there are no materialistic prohibitions against cold blooded murder. If you don't kill me, you're doing so by assuming the intrinsic worth of human beings - an ad-hoc, arbitrary value judgement that is hanging on nothing on atheism.
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR This argument never ages.
I have 3 adorable rats.
Tonight, there will still be 3 rats.
Take their food out, and in a couple of weeks time, there will only be one rat left.
We share a trait in that we are also social animals. We make friends and cooperate. Without this synergy we would not have come down from the trees and would instead be sole survivors who can only breed through rape.
Now, give us motivation, competition for food in a wasteland and we are animals.
manchester26m 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR Your 'value' depends on other factors.
Do you own a dog? If there was a situation where you had the ability to save either a human stranger from certain doom, or your dog, which would you choose?
Which holds more 'value', the human or your loyal companion? And why?
You will get two different answers on this one yet which is 'right'?
manchester26m 1 year ago
@manchester26m On atheism, why should I choose to save either? You can no more condemn me for sitting back and watching both the person and the dog suffer than if I acted "heroically" and struggled to save them.
Don't confuse objective morality with situational ethics - just because an extreme situation demands a less than ideal moral judgement, doesn't mean objective morality doesn't exist; on the contrary, we typically make the "best" judgements we can even under such circumstances.
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@manchester26m Also observe that you're pre-supposing the truth of atheism, a-biogenesis and full macro-evolution in your statements.
Even if you accept macro-evolution, that's only descriptive of the past - it doesn't prescribe present or future morality, does it?
I submit that if you weren't already committed to these ideologies, then you wouldn't have to explain away the sense of objective morality each of us feel, any more than you have to explain away any other sense experience.
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR There is no all encompassing objective morality. Take underage sex for example. In the USA, 18 is the age of consent. In some countries it is much lower or occasionally there is none. In the UK it is 16, Denmark 14 so even closely related societies greatly on what is acceptable.
Is it moral to kill a person in great pain?
Is it moral to steal if you are hungry?
Is it moral to lie to the Nazi's?
Is it moral to eat meat?
Abort a foetus?
Have non procreational sex?
manchester26m 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR You dont HAVE to save either. But if you refuse to act, expect to be shunned.
You are under the impression that Atheism means "Why should I? Whats the point?" but as I have pointed out, we are social animals, descendants of social animals. Synergy works very well for us. If we were solitary hunters then bumping off the competition would be beneficial in terms of gaining territory, females and food - But this sort of hunter doesnt get to kill the mammoth. The one with friends does.
manchester26m 1 year ago
@manchester26m Atheism certainly does mean a re-assessment of morality to the level of "Why should I?", I see no reason why it shouldn't. As Dawkins points out, we alone can rebel against our genetics, for good or ill. If your sense of morality gets in the way of my desires, why shouldn't I remove you?
The great contradiction of atheism is that no one can truly live this way. Take Dawkins - he affirms there's no such thing as good or evil, then elsewhere condemns religion as wrong and evil.
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@manchester26m As for your questions, surely you see they don't even touch the issue of whether morality is objective or not. All they show is that morality can be difficult at times and/or people have a fallible comprehension of such morality.
Don't fall into the trap of thinking objective morality is a rigid, inflexible set of orders, it's not - ultimately it's an attitude. As Jesus said in Mt 22 (paraphrasing) "Love God and love your neighbour. For the whole Law hangs on these two commands".
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR So REAL morality is an attitude?
So 2 men having sex is seen in Christianity as sinmply being amongst the spectrum of morality? In which case how does one define this? In Christianity, does anything go as long as it has the right attitude? What is the right attitude? Who has it and how is it defined?
As long as you love God does anything go? Is any behavior permissible?
My questions do not touch on objective morality because there is none. My examples illustrate that.
manchester26m 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR So the only reason you yourself do not morder indiscriminately is because some invisible fella is watching over you and deciding whether you go to a nice fluffy place of a horrific how place?
Its a good job you believe in a God then eh or everyone else in your neighborhood would be in grave danger!
Why shouldnt you remove someone who gets in your way? Answer - Because there are better alternatives. The great irony is that God fearing Christians are the biggest offenders here.
manchester26m 1 year ago
@manchester26m No, "REAL" morality is based in an attitude that reflects Gods own nature, and that attitude will have a logical outworking. If I love my neighbour, I won't murder...or steal, or cheat, etc. If I love God, I will have respect for His creation, and His created order (male and female, etc). It's not "anything goes" - that should be axiomatic. If a moral dilemma/difficultly is faced, where no options are totally good, then the "Greater Good" principle helps solve the issue.
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@manchester26m The reason I don't murder is because there's a logical and intrinsic worth to human beings as being made in the image of God (even those people I don't particularly like). On atheism no such value exists except as an arbitrary cultural throw-back to the Christian principles of yesteryear (in the West, anyway). We could equally adopt Stalins low view of humanity, and be no more "evil" for it. We are, after all, just re-arranged pond scum...and who values pond scum?
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR Intrinsic worth of human beings? You do realise this is a very recent development dont you? Shall we delve into the Bible to see what is says about slavery? How about being raped? How about what you should do with wayward children? Come on man, you dont base your morality on the words of God any more than I do. Humans do have value, the difference is that that value is mutable depending on the circumstances. i.e. not many tears are shed for dead Iraqi's but lots are shed for Americans
manchester26m 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR Right, so a greater good principle exists. So thanks for admitting that there is no all powerful all encompassing right and wrong. You accept that there are no moral absolutes and that every case has its own merits. You must therefore agree than no person has exactly the same moral code as another since the threshold to kill, steal, lie is different with everyone and that the situation dictates the actions to take - i.e. whats your motivation, which is what I have been saying.
manchester26m 1 year ago
@manchester26m Did you even read my past posts? I've been arguing for objective morality, not some wooden "moral absolutism" - if this misunderstanding is the root of our debate then it's easily resolved, for I and every objective moralist agree that, as you say, "every case has it's own merits".
My point has been far deeper: that the basic values such as love, charity and respect find their grounding in the very nature of God, and as such are external to us and objectively true/good.
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@manchester26m The atheist cannot say this, for as you note, "no person has the same moral code". One person subjectively values human life, the next is a murderer, the next a racist - who's "right"? On atheism even the question is absurd, for such values are delusory in the first place.
The question is: what reasons do we have for thinking morality to be a subjective delusion in direct opposition to our immediate experience and intuitions? Certainly nothing you've mentioned so far.
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
I knew you wouldn't answer the question! Why do you try to dance around my question? Just answer it! if your god told you to kill me, would you? If you won't be honest then we have nothing more to talk about! So, "yes or no", would you kill me?
99minerkc 1 year ago
@99minerkc Reduced to attempted "gotcha" questions are you? I gave you more credit than that dude...shame.
The question only examines the aspect of my personal obedience anyway, not God's morality. If God did command me to kill you, it would be for morally sufficient reasons that you yourself would recognise and agree with.
Now answer my question; would anything stop you from killing me if you had both the will and the opportunity?
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@ScottyVOR You still just cannot bring yourself to answer a simple question! I'm done with you as you're disingenuous as far as I'm concerned! To be honest, I don't know why I went this far given that a personal god doesn't exist(in my opinion), but I guess I want to see what kind of theist you were. I think I've seen enough!! I won't be reading any more of your responses as I've wasted enough time!! I'll end by saying, of course you would kill me if your god said to immoral as it would be!!
99minerkc 1 year ago
@99minerkc Have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or no? It's a loaded question that can't be given a "simple yes/no", and you know it.
If anything you show yourself as disingenuous by avoiding my (multiple) questions. When you've grown up a little and actually engage your position, instead of just childishly throwing stones, then maybe we can talk.
(BTW almost every sentence you've ended with exclamation marks. Overkill maybe?)
In any case, I wish you the best of luck.
ScottyVOR 1 year ago
@99minerkc stop doubting fam, seek God for yourself, Tim is just a man, how do you expect him to explain the spiritual? What reason do you want him to give for proven faith? Read the Bible and I'm pretty sure you'll find the answer to this question, cos I have
UnrealHelix 1 year ago