(October 2, 2015 at 1:26 pm)Rekeisha Wrote: You can't account for uniformity you can't be certain that tomorrow there will be uniformity. If you can't be certain about that then you can't be certain about logic and

We don't believe the same. As I have said before I met God before I could read the bible. God revealed to me that He is God. Then He lead me to the bible and His word. Everything He told me before I read the bible was in the Bible. Yes I Know the Bible is true. Yes I know how the bible was formed. Yes I know who God is. God is the author and finisher of my faith. So He started it and He will finish it. My life isn't about may ability to stay a Christian because like I said if it were up to me I would have walked away a long time ago.

His commission to the disciples is different than the great commission. Jesus sent the disciples on a short term mission trip as training for the future and laying the ground work for the fulfilled gospel. I have already had this discussion with God and He says do not grow weary of doing God so here I will stay. Until when I don't know.

I was using biblical verbiage (rev 7:14) and I knew you would take it that way. Still is the truth even if you don't understand. Did you not agree with this when you claimed Christianity? Where you in a cult if you did?

Seriously? That's what you're going with?


"We don't know if the laws of physics will apply tomorrow because the future is unknown, therefore the constants of the Universe must be actively maintained by a non-material super-being."


Not only is the first part of that completely untrue, the conclusion doesn't follow the premise even if it were true.


For one thing, there is ample evidence that the laws of physics simply cannot be changed or suspended, and there is not one shred of evidence that they have ever been changed or suspended for any length of time in any way. Because of this, it is in fact possible to know to the utmost possible degree of certainty that the laws of physics are constant, and that they will likely continue to function exactly as they do now until the inevitable heat death of the Universe.


For another, even if I granted that it could be possible for physics to just quit and walk off tomorrow, that still in no way demonstrates that its laws were being written or caused by anything, Gaud or otherwise. Even if the laws of physics were all wonky and changed all the time, that in and of itself wouldn't be sufficient evidence that Gaud is causing it in some way.


I'm aware you were using Biblical wording. You worship a Gaud depicted in an ancient book, and that Gaud demands the blood of animals and humans to wash away your sins just so he can stand the stink of you. You metaphorically drink this blood and bathe in it, and that saves you from burning in Hell, a punishment that your "loving" Gaud inflicts on people who refuse to believe in him simply because he was so careful to give them no reason to.


Yes, that describes the writings, actions, and beliefs of a cult, and yes, I was a cultist when I participated in that shit. Got any other questions?


So what things exactly did Gaud tell you about himself before you started reading the Bible? Furthermore, how am I to believe that your concept of Gaud wasn't influenced by any Bible-believers prior to your reading the Bible? It seems very likely that even if you had never read the Bible before, you could still pick up some concept of what "God" is supposed to be like just from being a conscious human.


I presume you're American, which means it's highly unlikely that you came up with the concept of Gaud in some kind of cultural vacuum; just about everyone is exposed to the idea before they actually start studying it, so your "personal revelation" could still have been a function of your imagination and your confirmation bias working in tandem to convince you that the voice in your head is actually a magical man in the sky.

(October 2, 2015 at 12:31 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote:

(October 2, 2015 at 11:17 am)Rekeisha Wrote: There is also a difference from having control over your own death and allowing someone else to murder you. If there is even the slightest doubt about wither Jesus rose from the dead they would have acknowledged that. There were 11 disciples and they were all willing to die and 10 were martyred. If they didn't know for a fact that he had rose from the dead I find it hard to believe that all of them would have been willing to endure what they did. At the very least one would have belled out

Ten Christians proved you wrong,yesterday, Rekeisha. They were asked if they were Christians, and were shot if they were. They didn't know the resurrection directly, they had only indirect accounts about it, and believed. They knew they'd die if they said yes and they still said yes. People will die for what they've convinced themselves is the truth. It doesn't matter if it's actually true or not. You're assuming that the empty tomb is something they actually saw, and that the resurrection is something they actually saw, and not something that became part of the legend later and was written down as part of that legend. All they had to believe was that Jesus was the Davidic Messiah and would rise again from death to save Israel, and they would refuse to recant on pain of death. It doesn't prove the story.

---

(October 2, 2015 at 12:29 pm)Rekeisha Wrote: I didn't say all were crucified. I will look into the Paul thing. Still we do know he was killed for his beliefs.
Jesus was killed by the will of God and he used the Jewish leaders jealousy and the Pilate's fear of the Jews accusations.
The disciples believed that they saw Jesus after He was crucified alive and ascend into the clouds. Paul believed that He saw Jesus on the road to Damascus. 

In the case of Jesus' death why would the Jewish authorities of the day not know where Jesus was buried and make sure that He stayed buried? They knew that He said he would rise from the grave so they were very interested that no one would try to make it look like He did.

The good Jews would have removed the bodied of the dead and buried them that same day. Deut 21:23 Since Jesus was crucified for political reasons He would have been allowed a tomb. Joseph of Arimathea was a part of the Sanhedrin and if He didn't allow the disciples to use His tomb why would he allow His name to be apart of that lie? He would have stated and made a point of letting everyone know He didn't give Jesus his tomb. Also the religious leaders would not have to lie and say the body was stolen. They would have stated where the tomb was that he was buried in because they would have made sure he was there.

How would the Sanhedrin have known what he said to his disciples about rising again? It wasn't a part of his public, but only his private, ministry. We only know about it because they (or someone they told the story to) wrote it down decades later.

And they had no reason to assume he'd be stolen from the grave, or rise, or anything. To them he was just another radical who claimed to be the Messiah. There were dozens of those, before and after Jesus of Nazareth.

Finally, you're again confusing what the legend of Jesus is with known fact. You're presuming that Joseph of Arimathea was a real person, was really on the Sanhedrin, and really gave his tomb for that purpose, simply because it's written in the gospels. But even if I grant that he was and he did, it doesn't prevent any number of scenarios in which the body could have been moved, or destroyed, whatever. Suppose Joseph offered the tomb for burial and the Romans said "sure!" and then dumped him in a mass grave anyway, like all the other convicted and crucified people were. Then everyone shows up after the mourning period and there's no body. GASP! He must have arisen!

A relationship with Jesus proves the resurrection because the Holy Spirit comes and indwells people only after Jesus rose from the Grave. The death is tragic and horrible but does not disprove a thing I had to say.

Again where is your documentation of Jesus being put in a mass grave? I have documentation and historical practice of allowing people convicted of political crimes being able to be buried in a non-mass tomb on my side.

Judas who betrayed Jesus could have easily told the leaders that he said he would rise from the grave when He approached to betray Jesus. Also when the people asked for a sign He said like Jonah would be in the belly of a whale for three days he would be in the ground for 3 days. This crowd included the pharisees. Also when He was teaching another crowd He said  "No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father." (John 10:18). He didn't keep this teaching a secret.

Also the idea of them adding elements to the bible to bluster there point of view is incorrect. There was no one controlling the text. There are multiple streams of the epistles and gospels being passed around and copied. Since not one group was controlling the text if there was an addition to the text we can see when that story would have been added. So it is an erroneous idea to thing that someone came and just changed things.

Jesus made sure that people knew that He was going to die so that when He did and rose from the grave the would believe. People are willing to die for the truth because Jesus died for us first. We aren't trying to gain entrance into heaven or have some political point made. Christian's in the past and even now don't always have a complete Bible or the Bible at all. It is God who they trust because we have received his salvation and are changed and given strength even in the face of death.

(October 2, 2015 at 2:05 pm)Stimbo Wrote:

(October 2, 2015 at 11:17 am)Rekeisha Wrote: There is also a difference from having control over your own death and allowing someone else to murder you.

Why? Just because you say so?

(October 2, 2015 at 11:17 am)Rekeisha Wrote: If there is even the slightest doubt about wither Jesus rose from the dead they would have acknowledged that.

And you know this how..?

(October 2, 2015 at 11:17 am)Rekeisha Wrote: There were 11 disciples and they were all willing to die and 10 were martyred.

(October 2, 2015 at 11:17 am)Rekeisha Wrote: If they didn't know for a fact that he had rose from the dead I find it hard to believe that all of them would have been willing to endure what they did. At the very least one would have belled out

If the September 11 hijackers didn't know for a fact that Allah was real I find it hard to believe that all of them would have been willing to endure what they did. At the very least one would have bailed out (note spelling).

No because there is a difference in intent and desire.

A good educated guess when you look at their actions in the scriptures. They were willing to show how they ran away from Jesus and deny him and question him. So if they question Him when they were alive If they didn't know that he had risen why would they keep a lie like that going?

For the death of the early disciple you may look at foxes book of martyrs chapter 1 History of Christian Martyrs to the First General Persecutions Under Nero
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers in my quick look.

They knew that there was a God that would judge them and that they were sinners but they leaned on their own understanding and sought salvation through Jihad and not Jesus.

The disciples actions are further proof for the fact that Jesus rose from the grave but that isn't the only proof. For all true Christian we have a relationship with Jesus and the worlds in the bible and the world around us Help to strengthen our faith.

(October 2, 2015 at 2:27 pm)Whateverist the White Wrote: My Gawd!!  Ninety pages and still going strong.  Hope you don't mind if I shorten your user name a little, Reek.  So how is it going for you?  Caught any souls?  Didn't think so.  What really amazes me is that anyone is still trying to get you to consider a good point.  

I'm pretty sure you are information proof.  Nothing is getting through to you unless it is God approved, and obviously nothing we can say is even worth considering.  How brave you are to come onto an atheist site with mind made up and your ears closed.  This will make a good story for you at church.  Man did you ever set us straight.  

You can call me Keisha. I can't save one soul not my job.

(October 2, 2015 at 11:09 pm)Redbeard The Pink Wrote:

(October 2, 2015 at 1:26 pm)Rekeisha Wrote: You can't account for uniformity you can't be certain that tomorrow there will be uniformity. If you can't be certain about that then you can't be certain about logic and

We don't believe the same. As I have said before I met God before I could read the bible. God revealed to me that He is God. Then He lead me to the bible and His word. Everything He told me before I read the bible was in the Bible. Yes I Know the Bible is true. Yes I know how the bible was formed. Yes I know who God is. God is the author and finisher of my faith. So He started it and He will finish it. My life isn't about may ability to stay a Christian because like I said if it were up to me I would have walked away a long time ago.

His commission to the disciples is different than the great commission. Jesus sent the disciples on a short term mission trip as training for the future and laying the ground work for the fulfilled gospel. I have already had this discussion with God and He says do not grow weary of doing God so here I will stay. Until when I don't know.

I was using biblical verbiage (rev 7:14) and I knew you would take it that way. Still is the truth even if you don't understand. Did you not agree with this when you claimed Christianity? Where you in a cult if you did?

Seriously? That's what you're going with?


"We don't know if the laws of physics will apply tomorrow because the future is unknown, therefore the constants of the Universe must be actively maintained by a non-material super-being."


Not only is the first part of that completely untrue, the conclusion doesn't follow the premise even if it were true.


For one thing, there is ample evidence that the laws of physics simply cannot be changed or suspended, and there is not one shred of evidence that they have ever been changed or suspended for any length of time in any way. Because of this, it is in fact possible to know to the utmost possible degree of certainty that the laws of physics are constant, and that they will likely continue to function exactly as they do now until the inevitable heat death of the Universe.


For another, even if I granted that it could be possible for physics to just quit and walk off tomorrow, that still in no way demonstrates that its laws were being written or caused by anything, Gaud or otherwise. Even if the laws of physics were all wonky and changed all the time, that in and of itself wouldn't be sufficient evidence that Gaud is causing it in some way.


I'm aware you were using Biblical wording. You worship a Gaud depicted in an ancient book, and that Gaud demands the blood of animals and humans to wash away your sins just so he can stand the stink of you. You metaphorically drink this blood and bathe in it, and that saves you from burning in Hell, a punishment that your "loving" Gaud inflicts on people who refuse to believe in him simply because he was so careful to give them no reason to.


Yes, that describes the writings, actions, and beliefs of a cult, and yes, I was a cultist when I participated in that shit. Got any other questions?


So what things exactly did Gaud tell you about himself before you started reading the Bible? Furthermore, how am I to believe that your concept of Gaud wasn't influenced by any Bible-believers prior to your reading the Bible? It seems very likely that even if you had never read the Bible before, you could still pick up some concept of what "God" is supposed to be like just from being a conscious human.


I presume you're American, which means it's highly unlikely that you came up with the concept of Gaud in some kind of cultural vacuum; just about everyone is exposed to the idea before they actually start studying it, so your "personal revelation" could still have been a function of your imagination and your confirmation bias working in tandem to convince you that the voice in your head is actually a magical man in the sky.

You don't know why there is uniformity so all that you base upon uniformity is founded in your assumptions. You walk around as if thing will be the same without certainty of the fact. I know why there is uniformity but you will not even consider that or challenge your belief in that. Roman 1:19-20 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

Why are you subjecting God to your morals. Since He has a different sent of morals who are you to judge Him?

He said he was God when I first met Him and that he was beyond time and that he didn't have a mother or a father I learned this while on a bus ride.

(October 3, 2015 at 12:52 pm)Rekeisha Wrote:

---

(October 2, 2015 at 11:09 pm)Redbeard The Pink Wrote: Seriously? That's what you're going with?


"We don't know if the laws of physics will apply tomorrow because the future is unknown, therefore the constants of the Universe must be actively maintained by a non-material super-being."


Not only is the first part of that completely untrue, the conclusion doesn't follow the premise even if it were true.


For one thing, there is ample evidence that the laws of physics simply cannot be changed or suspended, and there is not one shred of evidence that they have ever been changed or suspended for any length of time in any way. Because of this, it is in fact possible to know to the utmost possible degree of certainty that the laws of physics are constant, and that they will likely continue to function exactly as they do now until the inevitable heat death of the Universe.


For another, even if I granted that it could be possible for physics to just quit and walk off tomorrow, that still in no way demonstrates that its laws were being written or caused by anything, Gaud or otherwise. Even if the laws of physics were all wonky and changed all the time, that in and of itself wouldn't be sufficient evidence that Gaud is causing it in some way.


I'm aware you were using Biblical wording. You worship a Gaud depicted in an ancient book, and that Gaud demands the blood of animals and humans to wash away your sins just so he can stand the stink of you. You metaphorically drink this blood and bathe in it, and that saves you from burning in Hell, a punishment that your "loving" Gaud inflicts on people who refuse to believe in him simply because he was so careful to give them no reason to.


Yes, that describes the writings, actions, and beliefs of a cult, and yes, I was a cultist when I participated in that shit. Got any other questions?


So what things exactly did Gaud tell you about himself before you started reading the Bible? Furthermore, how am I to believe that your concept of Gaud wasn't influenced by any Bible-believers prior to your reading the Bible? It seems very likely that even if you had never read the Bible before, you could still pick up some concept of what "God" is supposed to be like just from being a conscious human.


I presume you're American, which means it's highly unlikely that you came up with the concept of Gaud in some kind of cultural vacuum; just about everyone is exposed to the idea before they actually start studying it, so your "personal revelation" could still have been a function of your imagination and your confirmation bias working in tandem to convince you that the voice in your head is actually a magical man in the sky.

You don't know why there is uniformity so all that you base upon uniformity is founded in your assumptions. You walk around as if thing will be the same without certainty of the fact. I know why there is uniformity but you will not even consider that or challenge your belief in that. Roman 1:19-20 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

---

Quote:Why are you subjecting God to your morals. Since He has a different sent of morals who are you to judge Him?

---

He said he was God when I first met Him and that he was beyond time and that he didn't have a mother or a father I learned this while on a bus ride.

---

The Bible says that people will judge angels so why wouldn't they also judge god, who made angels?  If I judge an angel as being bad then I'm also judging God for being evil because he allowed the angel's bad behavior.  And God has a lot of evil angels so God himself is evil.

(October 3, 2015 at 12:52 pm)Rekeisha Wrote: You don't know why there is uniformity so all that you base upon uniformity is founded in your assumptions. You walk around as if thing will be the same without certainty of the fact.

I have already explained why it's perfectly reasonable (based on evidence) to be certain to the greatest possible degree that the laws of physics have always remained and will always remain constant, since the beginning of time and until the end of time. Nothing has to be assumed in order to reach this conclusion; the evidence speaks for itself.

Quote:I know why there is uniformity but you will not even consider that or challenge your belief in that. Roman 1:19-20 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

Blah blah woo woo word salad word salad bullshit. You keep throwing this word "uniformity" around as if you have no idea what you really mean by it, and then you vomit Bible verses to the tune of "Look around! The birds and the bees and America and trees are evidence that Gaud exists! Yaaaaaay   "


Your argument, at its heart, is an argument from ignorance. You dig and you dig and you dig until you finally get someone to admit, "Yeah, I mean I guess we don't know some stuff," and then you shout,


"That's because GAAAUUUUD did it!"


So every time we don't know something, you're gonna claim that's where Gaud is? That's what he's doing? Are you sure that's how you want to play this game? Because if it is, history is filled with things (weather, for instance) that used to supposedly be explained by Gaud or gods, and then when we got around to really looking at them we discovered that there was no Gaud necessary for the phenomenon, nor was there any to be found.


If that's how you want to play it, then Gaud is an ever-shrinking pocket of scientific ignorance that loses power and meaning every time we learn something new. You're just playing the "God of the Gaps" card, which is a fallacious argument borne of ignorance and incredulity, steeped in emotional mumbo jumbo and deeply indoctrinated word salad.

Quote:Why are you subjecting God to your morals. Since He has a different sent of morals who are you to judge Him?

Since the first part of that is apparently an oddly worded statement and not a question, I shall neglect to answer it. As to your actual question (you know, the one with the question mark after it), I judge Gaud by his alleged actions, which both during and beyond Bible times are pretty reprehensible.


If the Bible really were true, it would mean that the Creator Gaud of the Universe is personally responsible for every scrap of suffering and death in the entire Universe, starting with the shitloads and shitloads and shitloads of men, women, children, animals, and even plants that he kills throughout the Bible itself. The being you worship is a blood-thirsty, war-mongering monster that supposedly burns most people in Hell forever over a test of belief and not morality (a test from which he systematically hides so we have to go on an ancient system of mythology and the word of people who already believe in him), and yet he is said to be the source of all goodness and morality in the Universe. That is the most self-defeating description of anything I've ever heard. A being cannot be all-good, all-loving, all-knowing, and all-powerful and also meet the description of the Gaud presented in the Bible. The two concepts are mutually exclusive, and it would be paradoxical for them to be qualities of the same being. The Gaud of the Bible is a blundering, immoral mess filled with hate and rage.

Quote:He said he was God when I first met Him and that he was beyond time and that he didn't have a mother or a father I learned this while on a bus ride.

He told you...that he is eternal...and that he has no parents. That's what Gaud told you. Ok. So, then, the Bible was the first religious story you tripped over after that, and you discovered that the being described there was supposed to be eternal and have no parents, and you took that to mean that the being from this book somehow revealed himself to you. Obviously, that's what happened.


Here's the problem with that: if you had bumped into another story about a god with those same two characteristics (say, because you lived in a different part of the world or because you decided not to start with the Bible), then you would have converted to that religion instead on the exact same standard of evidence. The number of gods, by the way, with those two qualities probably numbers in the THOUSANDS. Virtually every one of man's gods is immortal and/or eternal and/or dying-and-rising, and plenty of them are said to have no origin to speak of, or no mother or father, as you put it. You just happened to trip over the Bible first, so that's what you went with, and evidently the damage is irreversible.

(October 3, 2015 at 12:52 pm)Rekeisha Wrote:

---

(October 2, 2015 at 11:09 pm)Redbeard The Pink Wrote: Seriously? That's what you're going with?


"We don't know if the laws of physics will apply tomorrow because the future is unknown, therefore the constants of the Universe must be actively maintained by a non-material super-being."


Not only is the first part of that completely untrue, the conclusion doesn't follow the premise even if it were true.


For one thing, there is ample evidence that the laws of physics simply cannot be changed or suspended, and there is not one shred of evidence that they have ever been changed or suspended for any length of time in any way. Because of this, it is in fact possible to know to the utmost possible degree of certainty that the laws of physics are constant, and that they will likely continue to function exactly as they do now until the inevitable heat death of the Universe.


For another, even if I granted that it could be possible for physics to just quit and walk off tomorrow, that still in no way demonstrates that its laws were being written or caused by anything, Gaud or otherwise. Even if the laws of physics were all wonky and changed all the time, that in and of itself wouldn't be sufficient evidence that Gaud is causing it in some way.


I'm aware you were using Biblical wording. You worship a Gaud depicted in an ancient book, and that Gaud demands the blood of animals and humans to wash away your sins just so he can stand the stink of you. You metaphorically drink this blood and bathe in it, and that saves you from burning in Hell, a punishment that your "loving" Gaud inflicts on people who refuse to believe in him simply because he was so careful to give them no reason to.


Yes, that describes the writings, actions, and beliefs of a cult, and yes, I was a cultist when I participated in that shit. Got any other questions?


So what things exactly did Gaud tell you about himself before you started reading the Bible? Furthermore, how am I to believe that your concept of Gaud wasn't influenced by any Bible-believers prior to your reading the Bible? It seems very likely that even if you had never read the Bible before, you could still pick up some concept of what "God" is supposed to be like just from being a conscious human.


I presume you're American, which means it's highly unlikely that you came up with the concept of Gaud in some kind of cultural vacuum; just about everyone is exposed to the idea before they actually start studying it, so your "personal revelation" could still have been a function of your imagination and your confirmation bias working in tandem to convince you that the voice in your head is actually a magical man in the sky.

You don't know why there is uniformity so all that you base upon uniformity is founded in your assumptions. You walk around as if thing will be the same without certainty of the fact. I know why there is uniformity but you will not even consider that or challenge your belief in that. Roman 1:19-20 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

Why are you subjecting God to your morals. Since He has a different sent of morals who are you to judge Him?

---

Quote:He said he was God when I first met Him and that he was beyond time and that he didn't have a mother or a father I learned this while on a bus ride.

That's like the joke about the girl who saw a small man in her flower garden.  She exclaimed "You're a leprechaun and you have to give me your pot of gold!"  So the guy said "OK, but first you have to make love to me all night."  She said "OK, because I want your pot of gold."  So after banging all night the guy asked her "How old are you?"  She replied "I'm 27."  And he said "Here you are at 27 and still believe in fairy tales about leprechauns and their pots of gold."

Even the Bible says that people shouldn't believe in Jewish fairy tales.  If you think you saw God on a bus and had a conversation with him you're insane.  You should start a new religion based upon the revelations you got from your imaginary deity.  Women are suckers for stuff like that so it'll be easy for you to convert some of them and have them support you.  Before you know it you'll be rolling in the dough.   Just keep them mesmerized with a lot of mumbo-jumbo religious BS.

(October 3, 2015 at 8:48 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: If you think you saw God on a bus and had a conversation with him you're insane.  You should start a new religion based upon the revelations you got from your imaginary deity.  Women are suckers for stuff like that so it'll be easy for you to convert some of them and have them support you.

(October 3, 2015 at 4:17 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:

(October 3, 2015 at 12:52 pm)Rekeisha Wrote:

---

You don't know why there is uniformity so all that you base upon uniformity is founded in your assumptions. You walk around as if thing will be the same without certainty of the fact. I know why there is uniformity but you will not even consider that or challenge your belief in that. Roman 1:19-20 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

---

---

He said he was God when I first met Him and that he was beyond time and that he didn't have a mother or a father I learned this while on a bus ride.

---

The Bible says that people will judge angels so why wouldn't they also judge god, who made angels?  If I judge an angel as being bad then I'm also judging God for being evil because he allowed the angel's bad behavior.  And God has a lot of evil angels so God himself is evil.

God's ways are higher than ours. His thoughts are higer than ours. Those who are His children by adobtion through the blood of christ are allowed to judge angels because he gives them authority. So not all humans will judge angels and if anyone has any authority it is given to them by God. He has not given anyone the authority to judge Him.