@ZombieCobain Thanks man, I plan on starting a series of vlogs when I get back from vacation. Mostly it'll just be me bullshitin about whatever comes to mind, but alot of it will concern religion and atheism.
@CB1071 Well, obviously it does make a difference to the "Alpha and Omega" if it is an act that determines the fate of my eternal soul. Blasphemy is defined as " the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God". You don't have to believe in or respect any deity to blaspheme, in fact, it seems to be somewhat of a requirement.
@Inarchon Actually, if you took the time to understand what you say you dont believe in, you would know. You are merely profaning, bad, but not unforgiveable.
@CB1071@CB1071 I would know what? My assignment of blasphemy isn't refutable, it's the definition of the word. You can't change meanings to coincide with your own dogma. I understand what I do perfectly well
@Inarchon Sorry to have to be the one to tell you. But, it's true. I know you wanted this to be a momentus occasion, but .... you just have not accomplished what you desired.
See, thats what I find so interesting about Atheists, they take a few lines of the Bible and it does not make sense to them, or they cant absorb it, and they go twirling off on tangential arrays of ignorance.
There is nothing a non-believer can do to show a lack of reverence to God. Your actions are moot.
@CB1071 I wasn't aiming for a single video that contains the opinions I've expressed for years to be a "momentous occasion". I wanted to upload a video expressing my atheism as expressed within the confines of the blasphemy challenge, and I did just that. Mission accomplished. "They take a few lines of the Bible and it does not make sense to them, or they cant absorb it, and they go twirling off on tangential arrays of ignorance", funny, I could say the same thing about Christians.
@Inarchon <SIGH!> Once again, your understanding is just limited. It's like teaching algebra to a person with a serious learning disability.
Instead of asking questions, going for help, or doing research, you jump head-long into accepting what "the cool kids" are doing. Like a spoiled child who cant fit together the puzzle pieces, you throw thing against the wall in frustration -- without realizing the real meaning of the gift.
Yes, Christians "use" the Bible, too. Sad either way.
@CB1071 How is my understanding limited? The way I see it, your view is the one who is being inhibited. Your faith blinds you from looking critically at your religion, and simply dismissing someone else's view on the subject without a legitimate explanation is little more than your knee jerk reaction to protect your dogma. Don't pretend like you know my situation. I've been raised in the Deep South Bible Belt area by a VERY religious single mother all my life.
@CB1071 I've seen it all. The circular logic, the bullshit philosophy, the cop out arguments, the sentimental anecdotes. None have provided me with any evidence or significant weight in order to sway me into belief of any kind. And honestly, accepting what "the cool kids are doing"? That's your attempt at discrediting my arguments? Growing up in the middle of Texas, a state not exactly known for it's progressive, intellectual nature, I've made no friends with my philosophies
@CB1071 The Bible isn't some complex literary work, it may be boring, vulgar, and infantile as all hell, but that doesn't make it provoking or incapable of being understood. And by the way, by definition, a non believer is someone is doesn't pay reverence or respect to the concept of God.
@Inarchon The Bible definitely is not complex. Something vulgar couldnt be boring, could it? (Thats a joke!) The Bible is a relation of the events that lead to us salvation. There are many points that are vicious and many points that are beautiful -- like life. How can someone so young possibly have walked a journey that leads them to a final understanding of any one way of believing. I studied history, the Torah, the Bible, the Koran, mythology, Atheism and struggle with my understanding.
@CB1071 I’m sorry if I don’t find acts like rape, genocide, and burning heathens “interesting”. The Bible cannot possible lead to salvation. It’s pages feature far to many primitive, socially backwards, vicious, intolerant lessons and moral values, not to mention the numerous contradictions, to be taken seriously by any person seeking spirituality.
@CB1071 I never claimed to have as much life experience as you, but simply citing my lack of time spent on the Earth does not discredit my argument, nor does it bolster yours. The fact that I haven’t been swayed by any apologetics for faith, is the result of applying my greatest level of critical thinking and logic to the subject, not just on the meaning of life and how it came to be (cosmological debates), but also the sociological and psychological impact of religion on the world
@Inarchon Again, the events of the Bible, if you really understood them, have no contradictions. If you read it in the order that it is in, understanding the Greek and the Latin meanings, subject/verb agreement and not just hearing people skip through it, taking their words and confusion, putting it in your skull, shaking it up, calling it critical thinking, and pressing RECORD on your video camera. People have taken religion and done terrible things with it, but PEOPLE can also be assholes!
A priest's daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death. (Leviticus 21:9 NAB) "If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13 NAB) Cursed be he who does the Lords work remissly, cursed he who holds back his sword from blood. (Jeremiah 48:10 NAB)
@Inarchon Thou shalt not kill. Kill in the Greek means, lying in wait to commit murder. Execution is not murder, it is punishment for an offense. Harsh, but that was the case at the time. Not 2010.
If laws are written with the punishment to result in death, you take your life in your own hands, happens today. However, this is not killing -- the two are NOT the same and not contradictory.
@CB1071 How is the slaughter of disobedient children and homosexuals kosher back then with the supposed approval of God, and not now? Aren’t the laws of God permanent and the zenith of wisdom? If someone was to murder a homosexual today, or burn his disobedient daughter to death, a now unlawful act, would they still be within the moral high ground? If not, then what makes these acts justifiable within the confines of the Sixth commandment?
@CB1071 The laws of the Bible have inferior morality because they are not subject to change, and therefore, such laws made back in the time of the wandering tribes are now unlawful and therefore contradictory with God’s will.
@Inarchon Actually not, the law is immutable. However, man's laws have changed and are not in sync with God's law, but God allowed His laws to be fulfilled with the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Christ. Even God understood that man COULD and WOULD not be able to live up to his strict edicts and allowed Christ to bare our sins and take our punishment. No longer does He require blood sacrifices, Christ's blood covers us. Man's law is for the earth.
@CB1071 Why would an all-loving, benevolent God require Blood Sacrifice in the first place? Why did he feel the need to exact it upon innocent people? Doesn’t that seem to be a basic archetype of primitive superstition? “Man's laws have changed and are not in sync with God's law”. Is this to say that you think homosexuals should be killed for their sexual preference even now?
@Inarchon God is not your earthly Father or your Friend, He is Holy. Sins against His law are disgusting to Him, they are filthy. He demands your obedience as your parents do. You are blessed when you obey and punished when you disobey. By execution, you remove the sinner from his place of sin and send him back to God who created him. This is fair if you believe God to be God. However, as stated before, his love is overwhelming because He sent Christ to take that law off of your back.
@CB1071 This doesn't explain why his advocation and his part in genocide and killings of heathens and blasphemers is justified. Back then it was morally justifiable to enslave and murder those who you didn't understand, people were primitive. These laws of the Bible are the laws of a fabricated all ruling God, to reinforce social norms and to keep people in line.
@Inarchon Yes, in Exodus, a Mosaic book Old Testament (The Law), the land that God promised the Jews (His chosen people because they first worshipped Him) was inhabitted by those that did not live by the law -- the Canaanites, sons of Cain who slew his brother. They had to be driven out. This took war. Joshua did battle with them, God showed his strength by allowing the Jews to be victorious.
The Book of Romans (New), after the Resurrection, God and Man are reconciled. A God of peace.
@CB1071 This doesn't address my main point, why an all loving God would even require blood sacrifice in the first place. Why does the death of jesus justify the terrible acts of the past now? Logically and morally it does not make sense.
@Inarchon Adam and Eve were perfect, immortal, the way God wanted us to be. When Adam ate of the apple, sin was introduced to us by Satan -- disobedience, punishable by death, everything was ruined -- we chose it. But God wanted us. He wants us back in the position of Adam, the only way was to come Himself as Christ, God in the flesh. He put Himself as the blood sacrifice and with His resurrection, Satan is defeated, sin is no more, death is dead - man is reconciled. Christ is the new Adam.
@CB1071 See that’s the thing. God supposedly created all things including Adam and Eve. If he did, that means he gave them free will. That means he designed human’s capable of committing sin. Why would he make his creations with that particular flaw? God supposedly is all knowing correct? Then he should have know that in giving man free will he would cause their downfall. Why would he do that? Satan may have influenced us, but it was God who made us susceptible to him. Where’s the logic?
@Inarchon He did give you free will. But seeing His power with what He created and what He sees and provides for you, He wanted you to obviously choose Him. He is a jealous God. But, Satan hates you because God loves you. Satan wants you to curse God, because he is the first blasphemer and cannot be forgiven. He knows of God and denied Him. He wants to destroy you. Because we were beguiled by him, we chose wrong. We are not in the garden anymore, we suffer. So we eash must now choose.
@CB1071 If God is a jealous god, then isn’t also implied that he is not perfect? Jealousy is a human character flaw, something that would be a likely trait for a fabricated character. You have yet to address any of my moral inquiries. You fail to operate in a world using reason and logic, and instead replace it with biblical mythology and rhetoric to justify your points, when the morality of said passages are what I am criticizing.
@Inarchon By jealous, I mean to love Him and only Him because of who and what He is and having no God other than Him. You have to begin there -- The Almighty. Morality is a way that humans interact, it is sociological, relative, and cultural. Not holy.
@CB1071 Look, we've strayed far off topic with my original grievances. You have yet to address any of my main concerns with the Bible's contradictions, the benevolence of God, his requirements of blood sacrifice, and his omnipotence. It's late, and I'm getting tired of responding to your Biblical rhetoric, when it's that very morality whose credibility is under scrutiny. I'd like some actual answers to my moral qualms, not just the same old rehashed Biblical circular logic
@Inarchon Morality is something HUMANS have to get along with each other. This is human interaction. Its our social structure. Changes between cultures. Not relevant to God --- this is crucial to understand. There are no contradictions, just your misunderstandings. Yes its late. Must go to work in the morning.
@Inarchon God demanded blood sacrifices to remove sin. You put your sin upon the animal and killed it and burned it. With the smoke of the flesh, the sin was gone. The sin is horrible but He loves you so He wanted you to have an out -- blood sacrifice. First with animals, and then by law with humans, but He knew it could not continue. Man was too fallen. But He loved us too much. He is so Holy and we are so sinful. He came Himself to bleed for our sins and remove them. So much love!
@CB1071 If God knew that blood sacrifice was pointless in redeeming us of sin, then why did he demand it in the first place? Supposedly he was all knowing, didn’t he know that it would all be futile?
@Inarchon It is not futile. It is all part of the process to achieve salvation. The point was to sacrifice to remove sin, and sin no more. But we could not. SIn was upon us. We all were in danger of Hell. He loved us so much, the only way we could be reconciled is with the blood of the ultimate sacrifice. AND HE DID IT HIMSELF! We are covered with the blood of Christ -- God on earth -- when we accept it, God no longer sees our sins. We are new creatures. He loves that you chose Him.
@CB1071 The fact that a supposedly all knowing God made so many unnecessary steps to salvation shows the flaws in his existence. We were created in paradise, so what was the point of him casting us out? We may have sinned, but he regardless created us with that purpose in mind
@Inarchon It is all a part of a plan, you cannot peel it back and say it was unnecessary if you dont know where it is going and how it will end. Yes, it is not all revealed to us, but that is the essence of faith. My dad used to drive us on vacations to the beach when I was a kid. I did not understand the route he took, but I had faith that HE knew -- and he did, everytime.
@CB1071 That is a cop out argument, and you know it. "OH, we can't understand it so let's not question it"? Bite me, no kind of progress or reform is made that way. Faith is unjustifiable in the realm of reason
@Inarchon You must understand why God created us. He could have just left off with the angels and animals, but He didnt. He didnt want to just say Go or Come, He wanted and soul companion, and mind companion. He created all this beauty on earth as a domain for His ultimate intelligent being. And part of having the intelligence that He blessed us with, is chosing or not chosing Him. And He understands that. It was difficult, after the fall, to make our way back to Him. But now it is easy.
@CB1071 That's exactly it. There's no need for the fall. There's no need for redemption. There's no need for him to have created us with the instinctive ability to rebel against him. There's no need for any of it, it's just a chain of dogmatic fairytales used to incapacitate the masses with mindless dichotomy.
@Inarchon WE CREATED THE FALL. He gave us intelligence, He gave us immortality and dominion over the world, for us to enjoy -- He wanted us to have it, we did otherwise with it. It is our fault, but He made a way out.
I have enjoyed chatting with you. Good night Inarchon. I hope to hear from you again. Thanks for the conversation. You are very intelligent and your questions are valid, but not unanswerable.
@Inarchon Im a fellow citizen of the Bible Belt -- Tennessee! Not trying to convert you or make you see things my way, just trying to fill you in on a truth.
Your denial of the Holy Spirit, is like pissing in the ocean -- it is inconsequential to the magnitude of the reality.
@CB1071 I'm not trying to make any serious impact. I've enjoyed the contributions that Atheist YouTube community has made to my life, and I just wanted to put in my word, no matter how insignificant it may be
@Inarchon In that case, job well done. Ive enjoyed blogging with you. I know that you have your mind in the place that you feel the most peace with. I hate that peoples' use of the Bible and Religion turn others away so that they dont see the realness, and the striking dynamics of actually understanding what and who God and the Holy Spirit is. I know I have levied some disparaging comments, all in my attempt to be emphatic. No harm meant.
@MyAnabranchWench Am I to understand that your argument for atheists supposed jealousy of christ, is the fact that he got all the chicks and could grow facial hair? The pot dealer who lives down the street from me could brag the same...
@Inarchon If you are referring to any proof in general, than many have come to be convinced of the existence of God. If you are referring to scientific proof, such as repeatable experiments, then you will never have proof of the existence of God. I'm just being honest and trying to do you a favor without the insecure diversion of saying, "Science can prove God exists".
@Inarchon According to my own reasoning, volition has to bring about a first cause. I would consider such a statement to be a substantial case for the existence of God, but only byway of reason. I'm sure you've been to college. There is a college of Arts and Science. I think there is more to being human than just our faculty (no pun intended) of reason.
@MyAnabranchWench I take it that the whole “college” statement was a joke, and if it was, point taken. I don’t pretend to be an expert on the subject, but I’ll try my best. Causality is often an argument used by creationists and believers to justify the existence of God. However, God is not a valid answer, in that it just brings up the question of who or what created the creator. It doesn’t actually further the argument, but in fact it pushes it back.
@Inarchon No joke intended. According to your own definition, what is a creationist? Secondly, if the "creator" was created, then the creator would actually be a creature, not the creator.
@MyAnabranchWench Creationist: One who holds the religious belief that humanity, life, the Earth, and the universe are the creation of a supernatural agency. Secondly, while he would be a creation of some other deity, he would still be, by the requirements of the argument to be the creator of the universe. Just because he was also created, doesn’t negate his primary role. Also, your statement fails to address the point of the infinite regression of God’s existence, and doesn’t refute my point
@Inarchon 'Good to define terms. My idea of a creationist is a Christian who takes Genesis literally, without considering evolution or the findings of science. The primary role of the God I'm considering is the origin of existence, not just this universe.
@MyAnabranchWench Which means that God could not have created existence. In order for him to have, he would have had to occupy non-existence upon his creation of everything, which means that essentially does not exist.
@MyAnabranchWench Then by definition, he still did not create existence. In order for him to always have been, there must have always been a pocket of existence for him to inhabit. Which means that not only did he always exist, the universe always existed, which means that his role of a creator is entirely pointless
@Inarchon If someone says that God has always existed, how does that imply the universe has always existed? According to scientists, the universe is circa 15 billion light-years old.
@MyAnabranchWench As I said, existence encapsulates everything. The Universe included. In order for God to exist, there must have always been a pocket of existence for him to inhabit, consequently eliminating him as a creator. Your analysis of scientists conclusions highlights the fact of his nonexistence. Because the complex universe in which we live has a finite starting point, it is conclusive that a God that has always been cannot possibly exist
@MyAnabranchWench God is a entity is he not? Which means he would require a space to inhabit. One cannot live inside of one's own being. That means he would inversely exist, and therefore, not exist
@Inarchon An entity does not have to necessarily take up space. "One cannot live inside of one's own being." -- I thought we all did that. Don't you have your own being?
@Inarchon I don't know what you're talking about, or what point is trying to be made. You said, "A being who exists in the physical sense must take up space." I agree.
@MyAnabranchWench Then in order for god to have always existed, there must have always a portion of space to inhabit. Which is to say that, if God always existed, then there must have been space coupled along, or even predating his own existence. Therefore, we can assume by logic that space and time always existed in some form, because to say that god did it is just pushing back the question, doesn't truly answer how the universe came to be, and just raises the question of who created god
@Inarchon The assumption is that everything which exists is physical, just as assuming an entity always has to take up space. Scientists are saying that the universe came about through the Big Bang, and I have no problem with such findings. A good reflection on the nature of God can be found, i.e. energy can neither be created nor destroyed. As stated before, if "God" was created then we are talking about a creature and not God.
@MyAnabranchWench Like I said, I’m not a cosmologist or astrophysicist, so I’m just shooting from the hip here, but it doesn’t really make sense for God to be the first thing to come into existence. How and why would the beginning of time and space spawn such a complex entity? If your argument is that God has always existed, then doesn’t it make just as much or more sense to say that the universe has always existed in some small subatomic fashion and then spiraled out?
@MyAnabranchWench To me, it makes much more sense than presenting an all knowing, all powerful, thinking, feeling, complex entity into the equation that just introduces more unanswerable questions without producing any significant reasoning
ALL GODS are an egotistical construct of man. Odin, Allah, Shiva, regardless of their name and native origin, were designed with little more intent than to give us a false sense of purpose and scale in this infinite universe, and to force a moral code upon society used to dictate and subdue the thoughts and dreams of the masses. No exceptions
@connerjd You bet. Honestly, I hold all supernatural deities in equal contempt. Just because I grew up with that bearded fella lookin down on me doesn't mean that guys like allah or Odin (even though he is pretty badass) are free from scrutiny. I don't discriminate against any one religion, I despise them all equally!
@connerjd Yes, which of the deities are false, and how are they treated in an egalitarian manner? Since you consider some deities false, which aspect of the Numinous are you purporting to be the one, true, God? I appreciate your candor regarding your profession of faith/belief in God.
Wow, I can't believe how long ago this was. Hey there kiddo, keep up the blasphemy!
ExileInFire 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Welcome to the group of YT atheists… ★★★★★
Katalyzt
Katalyzt 11 months ago
the most important thing that u got info of all these gods and their religoun not just deny and ATHEISM 4 EVER AFTER
strike4may 1 year ago
Nicely stated. Keep posting.
ZombieCobain 1 year ago
@ZombieCobain Thanks man, I plan on starting a series of vlogs when I get back from vacation. Mostly it'll just be me bullshitin about whatever comes to mind, but alot of it will concern religion and atheism.
Inarchon 1 year ago
This is hilarious! You actually believe this make a difference to the Alpha and the Omega. What a colossal waste of time.
A little education... You cannot blaspheme if you dont believe. Only if you know of God and the Holy Spirit and deny them, can you blaspheme.
This is comical to do.
The only real thing is that, even your ability to deny, is given to you. You are stil loved, as ridiculous as you are. Poor misguided soul.
"I DENY THE HOLY SPIRIT!" Oh brother.
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 Well, obviously it does make a difference to the "Alpha and Omega" if it is an act that determines the fate of my eternal soul. Blasphemy is defined as " the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God". You don't have to believe in or respect any deity to blaspheme, in fact, it seems to be somewhat of a requirement.
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon Actually, if you took the time to understand what you say you dont believe in, you would know. You are merely profaning, bad, but not unforgiveable.
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 @CB1071 I would know what? My assignment of blasphemy isn't refutable, it's the definition of the word. You can't change meanings to coincide with your own dogma. I understand what I do perfectly well
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon Sorry to have to be the one to tell you. But, it's true. I know you wanted this to be a momentus occasion, but .... you just have not accomplished what you desired.
See, thats what I find so interesting about Atheists, they take a few lines of the Bible and it does not make sense to them, or they cant absorb it, and they go twirling off on tangential arrays of ignorance.
There is nothing a non-believer can do to show a lack of reverence to God. Your actions are moot.
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 I wasn't aiming for a single video that contains the opinions I've expressed for years to be a "momentous occasion". I wanted to upload a video expressing my atheism as expressed within the confines of the blasphemy challenge, and I did just that. Mission accomplished. "They take a few lines of the Bible and it does not make sense to them, or they cant absorb it, and they go twirling off on tangential arrays of ignorance", funny, I could say the same thing about Christians.
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon <SIGH!> Once again, your understanding is just limited. It's like teaching algebra to a person with a serious learning disability.
Instead of asking questions, going for help, or doing research, you jump head-long into accepting what "the cool kids" are doing. Like a spoiled child who cant fit together the puzzle pieces, you throw thing against the wall in frustration -- without realizing the real meaning of the gift.
Yes, Christians "use" the Bible, too. Sad either way.
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 How is my understanding limited? The way I see it, your view is the one who is being inhibited. Your faith blinds you from looking critically at your religion, and simply dismissing someone else's view on the subject without a legitimate explanation is little more than your knee jerk reaction to protect your dogma. Don't pretend like you know my situation. I've been raised in the Deep South Bible Belt area by a VERY religious single mother all my life.
Inarchon 1 year ago
@CB1071 I've seen it all. The circular logic, the bullshit philosophy, the cop out arguments, the sentimental anecdotes. None have provided me with any evidence or significant weight in order to sway me into belief of any kind. And honestly, accepting what "the cool kids are doing"? That's your attempt at discrediting my arguments? Growing up in the middle of Texas, a state not exactly known for it's progressive, intellectual nature, I've made no friends with my philosophies
Inarchon 1 year ago
@CB1071 The Bible isn't some complex literary work, it may be boring, vulgar, and infantile as all hell, but that doesn't make it provoking or incapable of being understood. And by the way, by definition, a non believer is someone is doesn't pay reverence or respect to the concept of God.
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon The Bible definitely is not complex. Something vulgar couldnt be boring, could it? (Thats a joke!) The Bible is a relation of the events that lead to us salvation. There are many points that are vicious and many points that are beautiful -- like life. How can someone so young possibly have walked a journey that leads them to a final understanding of any one way of believing. I studied history, the Torah, the Bible, the Koran, mythology, Atheism and struggle with my understanding.
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 I’m sorry if I don’t find acts like rape, genocide, and burning heathens “interesting”. The Bible cannot possible lead to salvation. It’s pages feature far to many primitive, socially backwards, vicious, intolerant lessons and moral values, not to mention the numerous contradictions, to be taken seriously by any person seeking spirituality.
Inarchon 1 year ago
@CB1071 I never claimed to have as much life experience as you, but simply citing my lack of time spent on the Earth does not discredit my argument, nor does it bolster yours. The fact that I haven’t been swayed by any apologetics for faith, is the result of applying my greatest level of critical thinking and logic to the subject, not just on the meaning of life and how it came to be (cosmological debates), but also the sociological and psychological impact of religion on the world
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon Again, the events of the Bible, if you really understood them, have no contradictions. If you read it in the order that it is in, understanding the Greek and the Latin meanings, subject/verb agreement and not just hearing people skip through it, taking their words and confusion, putting it in your skull, shaking it up, calling it critical thinking, and pressing RECORD on your video camera. People have taken religion and done terrible things with it, but PEOPLE can also be assholes!
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 Sixth Commandment: Thou Shalt not kill
A priest's daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death. (Leviticus 21:9 NAB) "If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13 NAB) Cursed be he who does the Lords work remissly, cursed he who holds back his sword from blood. (Jeremiah 48:10 NAB)
Contradictory
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon Thou shalt not kill. Kill in the Greek means, lying in wait to commit murder. Execution is not murder, it is punishment for an offense. Harsh, but that was the case at the time. Not 2010.
If laws are written with the punishment to result in death, you take your life in your own hands, happens today. However, this is not killing -- the two are NOT the same and not contradictory.
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 How is the slaughter of disobedient children and homosexuals kosher back then with the supposed approval of God, and not now? Aren’t the laws of God permanent and the zenith of wisdom? If someone was to murder a homosexual today, or burn his disobedient daughter to death, a now unlawful act, would they still be within the moral high ground? If not, then what makes these acts justifiable within the confines of the Sixth commandment?
Inarchon 1 year ago
@CB1071 The laws of the Bible have inferior morality because they are not subject to change, and therefore, such laws made back in the time of the wandering tribes are now unlawful and therefore contradictory with God’s will.
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon Actually not, the law is immutable. However, man's laws have changed and are not in sync with God's law, but God allowed His laws to be fulfilled with the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Christ. Even God understood that man COULD and WOULD not be able to live up to his strict edicts and allowed Christ to bare our sins and take our punishment. No longer does He require blood sacrifices, Christ's blood covers us. Man's law is for the earth.
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 Why would an all-loving, benevolent God require Blood Sacrifice in the first place? Why did he feel the need to exact it upon innocent people? Doesn’t that seem to be a basic archetype of primitive superstition? “Man's laws have changed and are not in sync with God's law”. Is this to say that you think homosexuals should be killed for their sexual preference even now?
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon God is not your earthly Father or your Friend, He is Holy. Sins against His law are disgusting to Him, they are filthy. He demands your obedience as your parents do. You are blessed when you obey and punished when you disobey. By execution, you remove the sinner from his place of sin and send him back to God who created him. This is fair if you believe God to be God. However, as stated before, his love is overwhelming because He sent Christ to take that law off of your back.
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 This doesn't explain why his advocation and his part in genocide and killings of heathens and blasphemers is justified. Back then it was morally justifiable to enslave and murder those who you didn't understand, people were primitive. These laws of the Bible are the laws of a fabricated all ruling God, to reinforce social norms and to keep people in line.
Inarchon 1 year ago
@CB1071 Also, just another example of contradiction:
EXO 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.
ROM 15:33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon Yes, in Exodus, a Mosaic book Old Testament (The Law), the land that God promised the Jews (His chosen people because they first worshipped Him) was inhabitted by those that did not live by the law -- the Canaanites, sons of Cain who slew his brother. They had to be driven out. This took war. Joshua did battle with them, God showed his strength by allowing the Jews to be victorious.
The Book of Romans (New), after the Resurrection, God and Man are reconciled. A God of peace.
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 This doesn't address my main point, why an all loving God would even require blood sacrifice in the first place. Why does the death of jesus justify the terrible acts of the past now? Logically and morally it does not make sense.
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon Adam and Eve were perfect, immortal, the way God wanted us to be. When Adam ate of the apple, sin was introduced to us by Satan -- disobedience, punishable by death, everything was ruined -- we chose it. But God wanted us. He wants us back in the position of Adam, the only way was to come Himself as Christ, God in the flesh. He put Himself as the blood sacrifice and with His resurrection, Satan is defeated, sin is no more, death is dead - man is reconciled. Christ is the new Adam.
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 See that’s the thing. God supposedly created all things including Adam and Eve. If he did, that means he gave them free will. That means he designed human’s capable of committing sin. Why would he make his creations with that particular flaw? God supposedly is all knowing correct? Then he should have know that in giving man free will he would cause their downfall. Why would he do that? Satan may have influenced us, but it was God who made us susceptible to him. Where’s the logic?
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon He did give you free will. But seeing His power with what He created and what He sees and provides for you, He wanted you to obviously choose Him. He is a jealous God. But, Satan hates you because God loves you. Satan wants you to curse God, because he is the first blasphemer and cannot be forgiven. He knows of God and denied Him. He wants to destroy you. Because we were beguiled by him, we chose wrong. We are not in the garden anymore, we suffer. So we eash must now choose.
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 If God is a jealous god, then isn’t also implied that he is not perfect? Jealousy is a human character flaw, something that would be a likely trait for a fabricated character. You have yet to address any of my moral inquiries. You fail to operate in a world using reason and logic, and instead replace it with biblical mythology and rhetoric to justify your points, when the morality of said passages are what I am criticizing.
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon By jealous, I mean to love Him and only Him because of who and what He is and having no God other than Him. You have to begin there -- The Almighty. Morality is a way that humans interact, it is sociological, relative, and cultural. Not holy.
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 Look, we've strayed far off topic with my original grievances. You have yet to address any of my main concerns with the Bible's contradictions, the benevolence of God, his requirements of blood sacrifice, and his omnipotence. It's late, and I'm getting tired of responding to your Biblical rhetoric, when it's that very morality whose credibility is under scrutiny. I'd like some actual answers to my moral qualms, not just the same old rehashed Biblical circular logic
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon Morality is something HUMANS have to get along with each other. This is human interaction. Its our social structure. Changes between cultures. Not relevant to God --- this is crucial to understand. There are no contradictions, just your misunderstandings. Yes its late. Must go to work in the morning.
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 Is this to say that God is above morality?
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon God demanded blood sacrifices to remove sin. You put your sin upon the animal and killed it and burned it. With the smoke of the flesh, the sin was gone. The sin is horrible but He loves you so He wanted you to have an out -- blood sacrifice. First with animals, and then by law with humans, but He knew it could not continue. Man was too fallen. But He loved us too much. He is so Holy and we are so sinful. He came Himself to bleed for our sins and remove them. So much love!
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 If God knew that blood sacrifice was pointless in redeeming us of sin, then why did he demand it in the first place? Supposedly he was all knowing, didn’t he know that it would all be futile?
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon It is not futile. It is all part of the process to achieve salvation. The point was to sacrifice to remove sin, and sin no more. But we could not. SIn was upon us. We all were in danger of Hell. He loved us so much, the only way we could be reconciled is with the blood of the ultimate sacrifice. AND HE DID IT HIMSELF! We are covered with the blood of Christ -- God on earth -- when we accept it, God no longer sees our sins. We are new creatures. He loves that you chose Him.
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 The fact that a supposedly all knowing God made so many unnecessary steps to salvation shows the flaws in his existence. We were created in paradise, so what was the point of him casting us out? We may have sinned, but he regardless created us with that purpose in mind
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon It is all a part of a plan, you cannot peel it back and say it was unnecessary if you dont know where it is going and how it will end. Yes, it is not all revealed to us, but that is the essence of faith. My dad used to drive us on vacations to the beach when I was a kid. I did not understand the route he took, but I had faith that HE knew -- and he did, everytime.
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 That is a cop out argument, and you know it. "OH, we can't understand it so let's not question it"? Bite me, no kind of progress or reform is made that way. Faith is unjustifiable in the realm of reason
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon You must understand why God created us. He could have just left off with the angels and animals, but He didnt. He didnt want to just say Go or Come, He wanted and soul companion, and mind companion. He created all this beauty on earth as a domain for His ultimate intelligent being. And part of having the intelligence that He blessed us with, is chosing or not chosing Him. And He understands that. It was difficult, after the fall, to make our way back to Him. But now it is easy.
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 That's exactly it. There's no need for the fall. There's no need for redemption. There's no need for him to have created us with the instinctive ability to rebel against him. There's no need for any of it, it's just a chain of dogmatic fairytales used to incapacitate the masses with mindless dichotomy.
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon WE CREATED THE FALL. He gave us intelligence, He gave us immortality and dominion over the world, for us to enjoy -- He wanted us to have it, we did otherwise with it. It is our fault, but He made a way out.
I have enjoyed chatting with you. Good night Inarchon. I hope to hear from you again. Thanks for the conversation. You are very intelligent and your questions are valid, but not unanswerable.
CB1071 1 year ago
@Inarchon Im a fellow citizen of the Bible Belt -- Tennessee! Not trying to convert you or make you see things my way, just trying to fill you in on a truth.
Your denial of the Holy Spirit, is like pissing in the ocean -- it is inconsequential to the magnitude of the reality.
CB1071 1 year ago
@CB1071 I'm not trying to make any serious impact. I've enjoyed the contributions that Atheist YouTube community has made to my life, and I just wanted to put in my word, no matter how insignificant it may be
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon In that case, job well done. Ive enjoyed blogging with you. I know that you have your mind in the place that you feel the most peace with. I hate that peoples' use of the Bible and Religion turn others away so that they dont see the realness, and the striking dynamics of actually understanding what and who God and the Holy Spirit is. I know I have levied some disparaging comments, all in my attempt to be emphatic. No harm meant.
CB1071 1 year ago
dummy
fiddlestickszz 1 year ago
@fiddlestickszz Wow, great troll man!
Inarchon 1 year ago
My concern is that atheists, such as Inarchon, will never admit to the cause of their jealousy of the Christ.
MyAnabranchWench 1 year ago
@MyAnabranchWench The cause of our jealousy of christ? Care to elaborate?
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon Christ was always surrounded by women, and He could grow a beard.
MyAnabranchWench 1 year ago
@MyAnabranchWench Am I to understand that your argument for atheists supposed jealousy of christ, is the fact that he got all the chicks and could grow facial hair? The pot dealer who lives down the street from me could brag the same...
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon The numinous/supernatural exists.
MyAnabranchWench 1 year ago
@MyAnabranchWench That's nice. Evidence please
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon What kind of evidence would be acceptable?
MyAnabranchWench 1 year ago
@MyAnabranchWench Any substantial physical, scientific, conclusive evidence of a supernatural deity or god
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon Are you referring to something like a repeatable experiment with the same results, e.g. the Scientific Method?
MyAnabranchWench 1 year ago
@MyAnabranchWench Any proof in general really. So yes
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon If you are referring to any proof in general, than many have come to be convinced of the existence of God. If you are referring to scientific proof, such as repeatable experiments, then you will never have proof of the existence of God. I'm just being honest and trying to do you a favor without the insecure diversion of saying, "Science can prove God exists".
MyAnabranchWench 1 year ago
@MyAnabranchWench What would you consider substantial proof of God's existence?
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon According to my own reasoning, volition has to bring about a first cause. I would consider such a statement to be a substantial case for the existence of God, but only byway of reason. I'm sure you've been to college. There is a college of Arts and Science. I think there is more to being human than just our faculty (no pun intended) of reason.
MyAnabranchWench 1 year ago
@MyAnabranchWench I take it that the whole “college” statement was a joke, and if it was, point taken. I don’t pretend to be an expert on the subject, but I’ll try my best. Causality is often an argument used by creationists and believers to justify the existence of God. However, God is not a valid answer, in that it just brings up the question of who or what created the creator. It doesn’t actually further the argument, but in fact it pushes it back.
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon No joke intended. According to your own definition, what is a creationist? Secondly, if the "creator" was created, then the creator would actually be a creature, not the creator.
MyAnabranchWench 1 year ago
@MyAnabranchWench Creationist: One who holds the religious belief that humanity, life, the Earth, and the universe are the creation of a supernatural agency. Secondly, while he would be a creation of some other deity, he would still be, by the requirements of the argument to be the creator of the universe. Just because he was also created, doesn’t negate his primary role. Also, your statement fails to address the point of the infinite regression of God’s existence, and doesn’t refute my point
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon 'Good to define terms. My idea of a creationist is a Christian who takes Genesis literally, without considering evolution or the findings of science. The primary role of the God I'm considering is the origin of existence, not just this universe.
MyAnabranchWench 1 year ago
@MyAnabranchWench Look at it this way. Existence encapsulates everything, correct?
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon Yes.
MyAnabranchWench 1 year ago
@MyAnabranchWench Which means that God could not have created existence. In order for him to have, he would have had to occupy non-existence upon his creation of everything, which means that essentially does not exist.
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon The correct response would be to say, "God has always existed."
MyAnabranchWench 1 year ago
@MyAnabranchWench Then by definition, he still did not create existence. In order for him to always have been, there must have always been a pocket of existence for him to inhabit. Which means that not only did he always exist, the universe always existed, which means that his role of a creator is entirely pointless
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon If someone says that God has always existed, how does that imply the universe has always existed? According to scientists, the universe is circa 15 billion light-years old.
MyAnabranchWench 1 year ago
@MyAnabranchWench As I said, existence encapsulates everything. The Universe included. In order for God to exist, there must have always been a pocket of existence for him to inhabit, consequently eliminating him as a creator. Your analysis of scientists conclusions highlights the fact of his nonexistence. Because the complex universe in which we live has a finite starting point, it is conclusive that a God that has always been cannot possibly exist
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon God is the pocket of existence which has always been.
MyAnabranchWench 1 year ago
@MyAnabranchWench God is a entity is he not? Which means he would require a space to inhabit. One cannot live inside of one's own being. That means he would inversely exist, and therefore, not exist
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon An entity does not have to necessarily take up space. "One cannot live inside of one's own being." -- I thought we all did that. Don't you have your own being?
MyAnabranchWench 1 year ago
@MyAnabranchWench How do you figure? A being who exists in the physical sense must take up space.
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon I don't know what you're talking about, or what point is trying to be made. You said, "A being who exists in the physical sense must take up space." I agree.
MyAnabranchWench 1 year ago
@MyAnabranchWench Then in order for god to have always existed, there must have always a portion of space to inhabit. Which is to say that, if God always existed, then there must have been space coupled along, or even predating his own existence. Therefore, we can assume by logic that space and time always existed in some form, because to say that god did it is just pushing back the question, doesn't truly answer how the universe came to be, and just raises the question of who created god
Inarchon 1 year ago
@Inarchon The assumption is that everything which exists is physical, just as assuming an entity always has to take up space. Scientists are saying that the universe came about through the Big Bang, and I have no problem with such findings. A good reflection on the nature of God can be found, i.e. energy can neither be created nor destroyed. As stated before, if "God" was created then we are talking about a creature and not God.
MyAnabranchWench 1 year ago
@MyAnabranchWench Like I said, I’m not a cosmologist or astrophysicist, so I’m just shooting from the hip here, but it doesn’t really make sense for God to be the first thing to come into existence. How and why would the beginning of time and space spawn such a complex entity? If your argument is that God has always existed, then doesn’t it make just as much or more sense to say that the universe has always existed in some small subatomic fashion and then spiraled out?
Inarchon 1 year ago
@MyAnabranchWench To me, it makes much more sense than presenting an all knowing, all powerful, thinking, feeling, complex entity into the equation that just introduces more unanswerable questions without producing any significant reasoning
Inarchon 1 year ago
ALL GODS are an egotistical construct of man. Odin, Allah, Shiva, regardless of their name and native origin, were designed with little more intent than to give us a false sense of purpose and scale in this infinite universe, and to force a moral code upon society used to dictate and subdue the thoughts and dreams of the masses. No exceptions
Inarchon 1 year ago
Way to go! You treat all false deities as equals.
connerjd 1 year ago
@connerjd You bet. Honestly, I hold all supernatural deities in equal contempt. Just because I grew up with that bearded fella lookin down on me doesn't mean that guys like allah or Odin (even though he is pretty badass) are free from scrutiny. I don't discriminate against any one religion, I despise them all equally!
Inarchon 1 year ago
@connerjd Yes, which of the deities are false, and how are they treated in an egalitarian manner? Since you consider some deities false, which aspect of the Numinous are you purporting to be the one, true, God? I appreciate your candor regarding your profession of faith/belief in God.
PresbyterJohnPrester 1 year ago