Haha! You don't like your own usual reponse now?

Sorry Rhythm... I should stop poking you until you actually make a point.

Wouldn't matter what my "usual response" was, you have failed to competently present your thoughts (I'm assuming they exist). That wouldn't be different even if I'd said -

"Waffles"

And I've proven why such a claim would be illogical which is why I would not make it let alone support it.

Back to the subject you're dodging.

Which would be? Just lay it out Frods, mystery isn't alluring in middle aged men like ourselves, it's just annoying.

You haven't read or retained what I've said, therefore you can't be interested. At this moment in time, and given your guaranteed pig headed blindness. Fuck you. Go look it up.

Or you could just, you know, re-link what I'm "dodging" in case I "missed it". It's really easy, we have the quote function, the posts are numbered......

-or-

as ever.... this is another bullshit claim.

Should I give this one 50/50 odds?

fr0d0 Wrote:Missy C

God wouldn't send a dog to hell for doing what comes naturally, because the dog doesn't choose it. Unlike in our hypothetical story.

You're right, he just sends humans to hell for doing what comes naturally by choosing to sin.

Quote:Humans have the choice and can love. They are different from dogs in that way. Nature still applies. Fate is nature. It's neither good nor bad. Evil is another word for bad, applied only to human action/the action of beings with the ability to choose between the two.

What about that cat that plays with its food? That bites the mouses legs off and bats it around for amusement as the poor mouse tries to inch away from its death with two legs and profusely bleeding nubs?
Not evil to you since its not a human?

fr0d0 Wrote:You're saying that fate should put the girl somewhere that would be just considering the girls actions to date. The girl would lead a charmed life/ one without reason to choose bad, because it would be so easy. Hence unreal/ without choice. This is how you're saying Gods reality should be, and I'm trying to explain how that's impossible.

I'm saying that if this is the system a god came up with, he's malevolent or inept. And yes you still haven't proven why there can't be good without bad or refuted my point that apparently god had love in adam and the world was 'good' before the fall. Without evil.

fr0d0 Wrote:In my reality there's hope. In yours there is none: Nature is neutral. Mine isn't a fantasy. It's very much as real as your reality. Belief is all that divides us.

In my reality I suffer because that's just the nature of the unbiased uncontrolled-by-deity natural environment that I live in. In your reality I suffer at the hands of a god who has power to do everything and does nothing. Who watches me suffer needlessly (or for the glory of his name) for a sin I never even committed then punishes me with hell because I can't fathom why such a potent being created such a malevolent fallible system in the first place.

fr0d0 Wrote:@ pineapple

Is hate possible in heaven...

Well angels have chosen to defect? I guess that means they are no longer in heaven, so you would be correct?

The bible speaks of Lucifer having covetous jealous self obsessed thoughts about gods power. He even thought he could be god. You said humans are higher in the heirarchy than angels because we can choose good and evil, but all those angels who defected chose to didn't they.

I missed you Missy C. So many crazies! (not everyone, just a select few)

(June 25, 2013 at 6:53 pm)missluckie26 Wrote:

fr0d0 Wrote:Missy C

God wouldn't send a dog to hell for doing what comes naturally, because the dog doesn't choose it. Unlike in our hypothetical story.

You're right, he just sends humans to hell for doing what comes naturally by choosing to sin.

No. People choose to ignore the choice not to sin. If I'm overcome with an instinctual urge to murder would a judge not convict me of manslaughter? That's still punishment. Do you agree with current secular law (where I live anyway)? If you do, how do you justify condemning God for the same descision?

(June 25, 2013 at 6:53 pm)missluckie26 Wrote:

Quote:Humans have the choice and can love. They are different from dogs in that way. Nature still applies. Fate is nature. It's neither good nor bad. Evil is another word for bad, applied only to human action/the action of beings with the ability to choose between the two.

What about that cat that plays with its food? That bites the mouses legs off and bats it around for amusement as the poor mouse tries to inch away from its death with two legs and profusely bleeding nubs?
Not evil to you since its not a human?

No. The cat is still acting instinctually isn't it? Play/ practice. It looks cruel to us. Can the cat ever feel empathy for the mouse? I don't think so.

(June 25, 2013 at 6:53 pm)missluckie26 Wrote:

fr0d0 Wrote:You're saying that fate should put the girl somewhere that would be just considering the girls actions to date. The girl would lead a charmed life/ one without reason to choose bad, because it would be so easy. Hence unreal/ without choice. This is how you're saying Gods reality should be, and I'm trying to explain how that's impossible.

I'm saying that if this is the system a god came up with, he's malevolent or inept. And yes you still haven't proven why there can't be good without bad or refuted my point that apparently god had love in adam and the world was 'good' before the fall. Without evil.

The world was good in that (guaranteed) allegorical story but people weren't capable of love. Just like nature is good, with all of the destruction and catastrophie that entails. With animals acting instinctively.

The proof is that without the freedom to choose you cannot choose. If I give you no option but to love me, do you love me? That's not love because for love to work you need the option to hate. It's an absolute and undeniable fact.

(June 25, 2013 at 6:53 pm)missluckie26 Wrote:

fr0d0 Wrote:In my reality there's hope. In yours there is none: Nature is neutral. Mine isn't a fantasy. It's very much as real as your reality. Belief is all that divides us.

In my reality I suffer because that's just the nature of the unbiased uncontrolled-by-deity natural environment that I live in. In your reality I suffer at the hands of a god who has power to do everything and does nothing. Who watches me suffer needlessly (or for the glory of his name) for a sin I never even committed then punishes me with hell because I can't fathom why such a potent being created such a malevolent fallible system in the first place.

Firstly, that isn't my reality. It's the one you had.
In my reality God unconditionally loves everyone and through love acts as only a loving parent can and exacts justice when confronted by wrongdoing. God forgives everything.

No one commited a sin on your behalf. You are guilty personally. Just like me. None of us are perfect.
In your current reality, you are still flawed, and you accept that life is not fair. Yet here you are criticising a reality that is fair.

(June 25, 2013 at 6:53 pm)missluckie26 Wrote:

fr0d0 Wrote:@ pineapple

Is hate possible in heaven...

Well angels have chosen to defect? I guess that means they are no longer in heaven, so you would be correct?

The bible speaks of Lucifer having covetous jealous self obsessed thoughts about gods power. He even thought he could be god. You said humans are higher in the heirarchy than angels because we can choose good and evil, but all those angels who defected chose to didn't they.

Yes thanks for bringing that up. My statement might be incorrect. I know humans are supposed to be superior to angels in some way. Interesting that the Quran says that 'Lucifer' (satan, whatever) wasn't an angel at all. But another god.

I did a little digging and found this. I wasn't trying to support my own POV here. This is just what I found. YMMV

Quote:Isaiah 14 is where christians claim that Lucifer was an angel fallen from heaven, but that is NOT what Isaiah 14 says, and Ezekiel 28 is where they CLAIM that it says that Satan was in Eden, but again, that is not what the text says Job is the main book that deals with Satan, but in the second chapter, God is talking with Satan, and God declares that Satan incited God against Job..........God declares directly that it wasn't Satan who did anything, but God HIMSELF did it

2 Samuel 24:1 And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.

1Chronicles 21:1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

fact is this, Satan is the left arm of the LORD, the aspect of testing and punishment.............Satan can NOT be viewed as separate from God

Deuteronomy 32:39 See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand.

Satan can not harm when God protects, and Michael can not protect when God harms

Quote:The Hebrew word translated “Lucifer” means “shining one.” The Septuagint uses the Greek word that means “bringer of dawn.” Hence, some translations render the original Hebrew “morning star” or “Daystar.” But Jerome’s Latin Vulgate uses “Lucifer” (light bearer), and this accounts for the appearance of that term in various versions of the Bible.

Who is this Lucifer? The expression “shining one,” or “Lucifer,” is found in what Isaiah prophetically commanded the Israelites to pronounce as a “proverbial saying against the king of Babylon.” Thus, it is part of a saying primarily directed at the Babylonian dynasty. That the description “shining one” is given to a man and not to a spirit creature is further seen by the statement: “Down to Sheol you will be brought.” Sheol is the common grave of mankind—not a place occupied by Satan the Devil. Moreover, those seeing Lucifer brought into this condition ask: “Is this the man that was agitating the earth?” Clearly, “Lucifer” refers to a human, not to a spirit creature. Isaiah 14:4, 15, 16.

Quote:No. People choose to ignore the choice not to sin. If I'm overcome with an instinctual urge to murder would a judge not convict me of manslaughter? That's still punishment. Do you agree with current secular law (where we I live anyway)? If you do, how do you justify condemning God for the same descision?

I don't condemn god he condemns himself. I don'tsee judges killing babies for being born to the wrong parents, or kids for calling someone bald. Not that i think manmade judgement or anymade judgenent can ultimately be fair. I just know based on your gods actions, he's a murderer. Based on his definition of an innocent, he has killed innocents. Or did that just not happen in your bible then?

Quote:No. The cat is still acting instinctually isn't it? Play/ practice. It looks cruel to us. Can the cat ever feel empathy for the mouse? I don't think so.

Well just from perusing youtube: yeah, cats can seem to have empathy for a rat. Even if my cat drops a half dead bird at my feet I don't punish it because that was what he was made to do.

Quote:The world was good in that (guaranteed) allegorical story but people weren't capable of love. Just like nature is good, with all of the destruction and catastrophie that entails. With animals acting instinctively.

The proof is that without the freedom to choose you cannot choose. If I give you no option but to love me, do you love me? That's not love because for love to work you need the option to hate. It's an absolute and undeniable fact.

You can also give me the option to love you or to not. As opposed to love you or I go to hell. You could even give me the option to just not love you and I can even hate you, you know-- not from Hell.

Quote:Firstly, that isn't my reality. It's the one you had.
In my reality God unconditionally loves everyone and through love acts as only a loving parent can and exacts justice when confronted by wrongdoing. God forgives everything.

Eternal damnation =/= forgiveness

Quote:No one commited a sin on your behalf. You are guilty personally. Just like me. None of us are perfect.
In your current reality, you are still flawed, and you accept that life is not fair. Yet here you are criticising a reality that is fair.

We seem to disagree both that fairness is even possible, and that your version of reality is fair per its fundamentals.

Quote:Yes thanks for bringing that up. My statement might be incorrect. I know humans are supposed to be superior to angels in some way. Interesting that the Quran says that 'Lucifer' (satan, whatever) wasn't an angel at all. But another god.

I did a little digging and found this. I wasn't trying to support my own POV here. This is just what I found. YMMV

Interesting but Pineapples question is can there be evil in heaven? In my understanding god tries to lock evil out of heaven via man. Meaning unless you have been born a man anf saved through jesus, one does not enter heaven. That assumes IMO that there is no choice once you're there both for human spirits and the angels.

What do you think of this Missy C?

I think Inigo puts it perfectly:

(July 1, 2013 at 7:52 pm)Inigo Wrote: And why do you keep saying 'come from god'? My claim is that morality requires a god to exist. Water requires H20 in order to exist, because water IS h20. But water doesn't 'come from' H20 does it?


1. Morality's instructions are instructions that confer reasons for compliance to any and all to whom they are addressed.
2. Only the instructions of an agent who has control over our interests in an afterlife and wishes to harm those interests should we fail to do as she instructs/favours would be instructions that would confer a reason to comply to all to whom they are addressed.
3. Morality is an agent of the kind outlined in 2 above.

An agent of that kind is, on common usage, 'a god'.

I think you're in denial about what God is. The version of God you relate is anti God. It's self contradictory/defeats itself. I think you're perfectly justified in rejecting it.

You have a problem, I think, divorcing that concept from anything which vaguely resembles it.