(June 13, 2018 at 6:48 pm)MysticKnight Wrote:

(June 13, 2018 at 4:41 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: While I appreciate your sincerity, no one has “proved” anything with regard to a god. What do you think it tells you when someone who openly admits they’d welcome the existence of a god still remains unconvinced, even after years of arguments from theists?

Because it takes time to get out of irrational type error thinking, it doesn't happen right away.

Still hasn't happened for you, that's for certain.

(June 15, 2018 at 11:52 am)Drich Wrote:

(June 15, 2018 at 12:44 am)Astreja Wrote: And you think this is a good thing?  

Yes because there is no bar to over come or in some cases to float over. Once God removed the bar it simply became a matter of doing your best. which means God does not demand we live sin free but simply try and do our best.

If you paint everything right and wrong you would have conditional heaven. meaning you would have to meet every rule. even when you 'good people' make up your own morality, you are not able to all agree on every rule.

I have no problem at all with people trying to do their best.  I do, however, see no special role for religious belief in the process.  If a believer and a non-believer both put forth the same effort, I think they should be treated the same.

(June 15, 2018 at 1:12 pm)Astreja Wrote:

(June 15, 2018 at 11:52 am)Drich Wrote: Yes because there is no bar to over come or in some cases to float over. Once God removed the bar it simply became a matter of doing your best. which means God does not demand we live sin free but simply try and do our best.

If you paint everything right and wrong you would have conditional heaven. meaning you would have to meet every rule. even when you 'good people' make up your own morality, you are not able to all agree on every rule.

I have no problem at all with people trying to do their best.  I do, however, see no special role for religious belief in the process.  If a believer and a non-believer both put forth the same effort, I think they should be treated the same.

Kinda the point. Jesus if you followed his life was very anti religious.

The "point" of all of this is to have direct contact with God. free from the 'responsibilities of morality.' 'morality' being a substitute for the atonement God offers.

---

(June 15, 2018 at 11:58 am)Khemikal Wrote: Interesting how that works out.  Christians have carte blanche to be utterly deplorable...but an atheist is going to be tortured forever no matter how decent they are.

There;s that noise again...I swear to christ it sounds like somebody is trapped in a box far...far away.....

Again white bread... its all a matter of perspective isn't it. your "decent guy" could be my ted bundy. You've/pop culture/pop morality has taken it upon yourselves to judge who is and who is not 'decent,' by using an ever sliding scale.

Let's say you live in a realm where the worst thing you could do is tell 1 white lie a day. Now Imagine how the man who told 1 white lie every day would be perceived.. this man would be a monster in that realm as he is at the max evil he can be. now imagine the guy who tells two white lies every day... this man could be considered the devil because he is beyond the normal scope of right and wrong...

But in when you compare these men with the level of evil you are willing to tolerate they are saints.

Here's the thing though, who judges who is righteous and who is not. is it your deplorible standard of right and wrong, or is it the standard of righteousness and atonement that is used?

IF God said we use the standard of right and wrong we are responsible to be never wrong, as that is the only way you can earn your way into righteousness.

Otherwise we must seek atonement and abandon the idea of being right 'enough' or a decent guy

Fore a man who will not yield his pride to seek atonement rather than abandon his sliding scale of right and wrong truly is a wicked man. as he will ultimately try and justify any sin if given enough time to live. meaning at some point a proud man who can not admit to his sin and will not seek atonement, but yet hold on the the archaic idea of morality being his guide will ultimately succumb to keep lowering his bar of morality until ultimately he justifies all sin. meaning all evil will someday be 'moral'. which is why "a decent bloke" is an egg of evil waiting to hatch sometime in eternity future.

(June 15, 2018 at 2:41 pm)Drich Wrote:

(June 15, 2018 at 1:12 pm)Astreja Wrote: I have no problem at all with people trying to do their best.  I do, however, see no special role for religious belief in the process.  If a believer and a non-believer both put forth the same effort, I think they should be treated the same.

Kinda the point. Jesus if you followed his life was very anti religious.

The "point" of all of this is to have direct contact with God. free from the 'responsibilities of morality.' 'morality' being a substitute for the atonement God offers.

But why atone?  Why not just strive to do good?  It's not as if one can undo things that are already done; all you can really do is do things differently.

I also don't see responsibilities as something that one must free oneself from.  I view them more as ways of being, rather than something external that gets attached to us.

You know....Drich, you talk alot of shit about your betters for such a tiny asshole, lol.    Get your daddy on the phone, we need to have words about how he;s raising you up.

(June 15, 2018 at 3:12 pm)Astreja Wrote:

(June 15, 2018 at 2:41 pm)Drich Wrote: Kinda the point. Jesus if you followed his life was very anti religious.

The "point" of all of this is to have direct contact with God. free from the 'responsibilities of morality.' 'morality' being a substitute for the atonement God offers.

But why atone?  Why not just strive to do good?  It's not as if one can undo things that are already done; all you can really do is do things differently.

I also don't see responsibilities as something that one must free oneself from.  I view them more as ways of being, rather than something external that gets attached to us.

Because what is good?

"Good" is the measure of the law pop culture says it wants to keep. So in 1930's germany "good" was a citizen of the blonde hair blue eye persuasion turning over jews to bein in turned in ghettos and later concentration camps and eventually the gas chambers.. 

This is 'good' and anyone who blindly accepts that our pop culture is better and can not object to anything we do now as not being 'good' would be in the same position in 1930's germany. because they too were caught up in the 'morality' the culture provided to the point they even separated from the church and hitler became their religious leader, or rather the minister of religion did who answered to hitler.

Do you understand what I am saying? from with in the culture you have no way of being objective. your "right and wrong" is right for the moment and wrong for the moment. That said, who's to say when you judge someone right, good or moral they are not someone else's evil incarnate?
Use to be it was always wrong to kill a child. there was never an excuse to kill a baby. Now it is immoral to tell a woman she can't kill her child. All she need do is agree to call it a fetus (latin for baby) and it ceases being a human child and she then can have it pulled apart in her womb with a vacuum.

again if you in this culture can not see anything wrong here you can count yourself among those i 1930s germany who bought the very same type of propaganda where all the society need do was dehumanize the people they wanted to kill. once they were not human/baby and became a thing/fetus/retarded/jew it became one's obligation to see those human roaches destroyed!

So why not good? because good is not a thing. good is compermise from the perfection that is mandated.. God demand perfection to enter heaven and KNOWS we can't obtain it, so rather than allow 'good' to be enough (good being an ever downward sliding scale) he demanded we humble ourselves just enough to admit that 'good' is garbage. and accept forgiveness which then makes an allowance for Good.

Because without this admission of guilt 'good' is a time bomb that will eventually allow all evil. meaning at some point if a culture lives long enough 'all evil' will eventually be moral. when we accept God's atonement we maintain or keep God's perfect standard as our guide posts which demandes a high level of 'good' to be striven for.

---

(June 15, 2018 at 3:26 pm)Khemikal Wrote: You know....Drich, you talk alot of shit about your betters for such a tiny asshole, lol.    Get your daddy on the phone, we need to have words about how he;s raising you up.

Again sport how do you know whether or not your 'talking to daddy or not?" You have no point of reference. you never heard his voice, you never accepted anything He has said to this point, so then how do you know who you are speaking with?

my daddy isn't going to put on the clown suit you pretend god must wear. my daddy will or rather has spoken to you as He is but you are too stupid to know his voice, because you are too busy looking in the sky for your daddy.

Your like Jim carry in bruce almighty look for a great cosmic figure, but does realize the janitor was the man He was looking for

Or luke looking for the jedi master but to wrapped up in his own idea of what a jedi is to speak to yoda..

you would not know who God was if he spoke to you or has been speaking to you for years. why? because you are too proud to admit the ideas you have about God as sooo wrong, God is not willing to support your bs as it would cripply spiritually for the rest of your life.

You want to hear God go read something that would teach you to recognise his voice his words!

I;m entirely certain that I;m not speaking to a god right now, lol.  

You know, your boyfriend is starting to seem like the type of guy who lives in canada and never answers the phone......

(June 15, 2018 at 4:19 pm)Drich Wrote: Because what is good?

"Good" is the measure of the law pop culture says it wants to keep. So in 1930's germany "good" was a citizen of the blonde hair blue eye persuasion turning over jews to being in turned in ghettos and later concentration camps and eventually the gas chambers... 

If you're going down that road, don't bother calling the god of the Bible good either.  Between the Noachide flood and the whole "Believe in Jesus or go to hell" story arc, the actions of your god are just as morally iffy, if not more so.  One would expect a god to know better than the fan club of an Austrian painter with a silly moustache.

Quote:Do you understand what I am saying? from with in the culture you have no way of being objective.

I'm not objective, not at all.  I think the concept of objective morality is a contradiction in terms.  As soon as value judgements become involved, we are dealing with subjectivity.

Quote:Now it is immoral to tell a woman she can't kill her child. All she need do is agree to call it a fetus (latin for baby) and it ceases being a human child and she then can have it pulled apart in her womb with a vacuum.

So how much have you donated to support women who decide to keep their babies, Drich?  I'm talking food, shelter, education, childcare if she needs to go back to work to support the rest of her family.

For that matter, how much have you donated to help provide quality contraception to women who can't afford it, so that they don't become pregnant and don't need to get an abortion?  (I'm up to $100 CDN donations so far in the last 12 months.)

Quote:when we accept God's atonement we maintain or keep God's perfect standard as our guide posts which demands a high level of 'good' to be striven for.

There is nothing perfect about the standards of the Biblical god.

(June 15, 2018 at 5:49 pm)Astreja Wrote:

---

(June 15, 2018 at 4:19 pm)Drich Wrote: Because what is good?

"Good" is the measure of the law pop culture says it wants to keep. So in 1930's germany "good" was a citizen of the blonde hair blue eye persuasion turning over jews to being in turned in ghettos and later concentration camps and eventually the gas chambers... 

If you're going down that road, don't bother calling the god of the Bible good either.  Between the Noachide flood and the whole "Believe in Jesus or go to hell" story arc, the actions of your god are just as morally iffy, if not more so.  One would expect a god to know better than the fan club of an Austrian painter with a silly moustache.

Quote:Do you understand what I am saying? from with in the culture you have no way of being objective.

I'm not objective, not at all.  I think the concept of objective morality is a contradiction in terms.  As soon as value judgements become involved, we are dealing with subjectivity.

Quote:Now it is immoral to tell a woman she can't kill her child. All she need do is agree to call it a fetus (latin for baby) and it ceases being a human child and she then can have it pulled apart in her womb with a vacuum.

So how much have you donated to support women who decide to keep their babies, Drich?  I'm talking food, shelter, education, childcare if she needs to go back to work to support the rest of her family.

For that matter, how much have you donated to help provide quality contraception to women who can't afford it, so that they don't become pregnant and don't need to get an abortion?  (I'm up to $100 CDN donations so far in the last 12 months.)

Quote:when we accept God's atonement we maintain or keep God's perfect standard as our guide posts which demands a high level of 'good' to be striven for.

---

Quote:There is nothing perfect about the standards of the Biblical god.

Although the Bible talks a lot about good and evil and sin that's not what it's really about.  Everything is based on complete obedience and total loyalty to the boss regardless of cost of harm or injury to the individual.  While all of the biblical stories are based on one or more of the Ten Commandments found in Exodus 34:12-28 they revolve around obedience and loyalty. Sometimes the character is completely obedient and loyal (like Noah and Yeshua) and sometimes he isn't (like Samson, Saul and David).   The character can do "evil" acts without negative consequences as long as he's obedient and loyal to the boss.  But if he goes against that like Saul did when he showed mercy and didn't kill everyone as directed he ends upon the shitlist.

(June 15, 2018 at 8:41 am)LadyForCamus Wrote:

(June 15, 2018 at 12:49 am)Godscreated Wrote:  Joods, God did not make people with sin

But he did make them knowing ahead of time they would sin.  For all practical purposes, those two scenarios are exactly the same.

 Not at all, a football coach knows ahead of time that his team is going to lose certain games, yet he asks his team to play the game. The coach cares about the character of his players and God loved us so much He had to create us. The only way that man would have never sinned was for God not to have created us.

GC