When I was young, there was a god with infinite power protecting me. Is there anyone else who felt that way? And was sure about it? but the first time I fell in love, I was thrown down - or maybe I broke free - and I bade farewell to God and became human. Now I don't have God's protection, and I walk on the ground without wings, but I don't regret this hardship. I want to live as a person. -Arina Tanemura
Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: December 24, 2024, 6:22 am
Thread Rating:
Proverbs 16:4
|
(May 19, 2011 at 7:52 am)Nimzo Wrote:
"If there are gaps they are in our knowledge, not in things themselves." Chapman Cohen
"Shit-apples don't fall far from the shit-tree, Randy." Mr. Lahey (May 19, 2011 at 7:52 am)Nimzo Wrote:If A created everything and B exists, then A created B. If you can't understand that then you have no business discussing this.(May 19, 2011 at 6:35 am)FaithNoMore Wrote: Logic dictates nothing can fall outside of my assertion. Either refute it or qut replying.Not according to any Law of Logic that I am aware of. Nimzo Wrote:And my point is that obviously an ancient text (such as the verse which is the subject of this thread - though you wouldn't know it reading your posts) cannot be referring to televisions - notice my underline. The fact that God does not create televisions is irrelevant to the topic at hand.The ancient text in discussion says God created everything so whether or not God created televisions is very relevant. Nimzo Wrote:And until you have justified your assertion by demonstrating that your trichotomy includes every logical possibility, I see no reason to take it seriously.Again, I can't make it any clearer than I have. Nimzo Wrote:The obvious counterexample would be God Himself, who exists (arguendo), but God is not "responsible" for His own existence.The assertion has nothing to do with God's responsibility for his own existence but it has to do with his responsibility for evil so I'm not even sure why you posted this sentence.
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
RE: Proverbs 16:4
May 19, 2011 at 4:01 pm
(This post was last modified: May 19, 2011 at 4:01 pm by Nimzo.)
(May 19, 2011 at 3:31 pm)FaithNoMore Wrote: If A created everything and B exists, then A created B.Firstly, that is not a Law of Logic, but a syllogism. Secondly, it is a non-sequitur because you are equivocating "things" and "things that exist". The text (at least our ye olde King James Version) does not say God created all things that exist. It says God created "all things". Since evil is not a "thing", but a moral property, you will need to search a bit harder for your elusive Law of Logic. Quote:The ancient text in discussion says God created everything so whether or not God created televisions is very relevant.We are discussing your post's relevance to mine - not your post's relevance to the text. Quote:Again, I can't make it any clearer than I have.It is rationality that is the issue, not clarity. Quote:The assertion has nothing to do with God's responsibility for his own existence but it has to do with his responsibility for evil so I'm not even sure why you posted this sentence.I was providing a counterexample to your assertion that "if God created everything, and something exists, then he is either directly or indirectly responsible for it". I am applying your asserted principle to the case of God's existence, which I am quite free to do to show its absurdity. RE: Proverbs 16:4
May 19, 2011 at 5:41 pm
(This post was last modified: May 19, 2011 at 5:48 pm by Statler Waldorf.)
Proverbs was originally written in Hebrew their Toots. Jesus is a fictional character now? You really are a radical individual aren't you? Simple. God is both loving and just. The only way He could demonstrate this using His creation is to demonstrate His justice by giving rebellious creatures their just punishments and giving other rebellious creatures grace by having His son atone for their sins. Makes sense to me. (May 19, 2011 at 5:41 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: The only way He could demonstrate this using His creation is to demonstrate His justice by giving rebellious creatures their just punishments and giving other rebellious creatures grace by having His son atone for their sins. Makes sense to me. The only way? I thought he was omnipotent RE: Proverbs 16:4
May 19, 2011 at 5:57 pm
(This post was last modified: May 19, 2011 at 6:03 pm by Statler Waldorf.)
I am not sure by which logical basis you think that inspired texts need to be written only at a simple level. The book of John is amazingly simple and yet has beautifully written underlying complexity to it. I think you are erroneously assuming that all people contain the moral ability to come to Christ, so a lot of people who "should" have come to Christ didn't just because they didn't understand the text. I believe this is a false assumption. We see in scripture that there were people who witnessed Jesus raise a dead man to life and yet didn't believe he was the Messiah. Why is this? Is it because they didn’t have enough proof? Of course not, it's because apart from the saving grace of God man is unable to come to Christ (John 6). Jesus also said the reason he spoke in parables was to hide the truth from those whom God didn't want to reveal His kingdom (Mark 4). So I do not think scripture backs up your assumptions here. *cringes at your misunderstanding of the Biblical concept of omnipotence* Logically speaking, if He created all good creatures this would not demonstrate His justice. If He had created and judged all wicked creatures this would not show is love. So the only logical way to demonstrate both with His creation (which is still consistent with the definition of omnipotence) is to do a combination of both, which He did. (May 19, 2011 at 1:28 pm)Doubting Thomas Wrote: Why not just create good people in Heaven to kiss God's ass for eternity? Ahh there you go thinking again, Thomas. Remember he already created a being to kiss his ass: angels. I guess that just wasn't enough for him, so he had to create humans of whom he would demand they heap more praises on to himself, only to foreknow that millions of us would ultimately wind up in hell for not believing or for being born in other nations where Christianity is not prevalent.
Our Daily Train blog at jeremystyron.com
--- We have lingered in the chambers of the sea | By sea-girls wreathed with seaweed red and brown | Till human voices wake us, and we drown. — T.S. Eliot "... man always has to decide for himself in the darkness, that he must want beyond what he knows. ..." — Simone de Beauvoir "As if that blind rage had washed me clean, rid me of hope; for the first time, in that night alive with signs and stars, I opened myself to the gentle indifference of the world. Finding it so much like myself—so like a brother, really—I felt that I had been happy and that I was happy again." — Albert Camus, "The Stranger" --- Why do you assume that just because you don't understand why God does something a certain way it automatically makes it unjust, or proves he is not real? I don't see the logic in that at all my friend. (May 18, 2011 at 11:15 am)Skipper Wrote: Proverbs 16:4 I agree God created all things, including the opportunity to sin, you and the devil and angels, etc. Look up the work maaneh (it goes where things for himself is) and would be better translated in context like this :The LORD hath made all things to give account unto Him: yea, even the wicked.... Which happens to fit the rest of the verses surrounding it about taking account on the judgement day. Cherry pick much?
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)