Another law thread

[Drich]

But what I want to know is(and pardon me if you feel you've answered this, but I don't feel you have)is there any part of you that doubts that it was an authentic, divine experience?

At the time I was pretty sure it was just a dream because it did not coincide with any of the examples of hell that I had heard of to that point in my life. Again I was raised with the Dante's inferno model. As I sought god out over the coming years and found what I had dreamed to be biblically accurate combining the accounts of Sheol (OT) and lake of fire (NT) I became convinced this was a message or Revelation from God.

---

You've missed the point of my illustration. If you do not currently involve yourself in and advertise death penality level crimes, you would have fallen into a reality where your soceity has adopted the 'morality' of a verfiable God.

I do not even know what this means.

God says it does. Either one worships God or one is in rebellion. This is illustrated by Christ over and over in his teachings "Wheat/Weeds, Wheat/Chaff, Sheep/Goats" One is either accepted by God or he is not.

Sure, god can say whatever he wants. From a personal standpoint, I can remain ambivalent to him, regardless of whether his existence is proven or not. You say if he did prove himself it would deny free will, and then when I tell you it wouldn't for me, you start talking about what god's thinking, like that at all matters given the example.

Your missing the big picture. This Very thing has happened in two periods of History already. (in two completely different cultures in two different time frames.) The results were the same both times.. How is it you believe despite actual evidence in the Historical record that you know things would work differently?

Because- as my repeated use of the pronoun "I" might have suggested- I was speaking only in personal terms, in response to your original premise. I know what's in my head.

... He said, knowing full well that you're next going to argue that I don't because god.

My example using death penalty crimes establishes that you are not an anti societal extremist. Like Osama bin Ladin, correct? Which makes you compliant or accepting of ALL the laws concerning death penalty crimes does it not? or again have you committed a death penalty level crime in open defiance of the western culture as Osama has? If yes please use this opportunity to claim your actions as Osama has completing the sociopaths pattern. if not then understand that you are willing subject to all laws concerning capital offenses. As such if Christ in his time here two thousand years ago established A verifiable open channel to heaven that scientist could test and approve as being the real deal. Then it would be safe to say our societies would look a lot different. Our laws would most likely reflect the laws the bible outlines as was the case in OT Judaism and in the dark ages when the Christian church ran the world into the ground.

Again because as you have demonstrated you do not have it in you to fight against the society's highest level offenses, and that you are willing to simply roll over and adopt what society has deemed to be 'moral'. It would stand to reason that you would have simply adopted societies standards even if some of the sins you enjoy now were elevated to capital crimes. Or again do you think yourself such a different person than the millions who lived and submitted themselves under church rule? In truth the only difference between you and some poor guy living 1500 years ago is the benefit of perspective that he provided by living in such terrible times. Without it you would not even question the life society had slated for you to live. As demonstrated by your current acceptance of all the major laws you dare not break.

[Cinjin]

But what I want to know is(and pardon me if you feel you've answered this, but I don't feel you have)is there any part of you that doubts that it was an authentic, divine experience?

At the time I was pretty sure it was just a dream because it did not coincide with any of the examples of hell that I had heard of to that point in my life. Again I was raised with the Dante's inferno model. As I sought god out over the coming years and found what I had dreamed to be biblically accurate combining the accounts of Sheol (OT) and lake of fire (NT) I became convinced this was a message or Revelation from God.

Interesting (and when I say interesting, I really mean laughable). Your use of the words "I became convinced" are very telling. You think Moses "became convinced" long after he witnessed the alleged burning bush? Your god seemed to have no problem making people extremely aware of his presence long before video cameras and the internet, but these days his amazing revelations have to be pondered and considered a bit. Hmm, I wonder why it is that even his own sheep are not completely sure that they've been given a revelation/vision? You had a dream dude. That's all. You're not special ... well, at least not in the way you think you are.

[Ryantology]

If you know to be real without doubt, then you know everything He has told us would also be real without question. Salvation ceases to be about loving God, and becomes a matter of self preservation. Even if you resent God the knowledge of Him and your coming judgement would at the very least place on in a position "moral" justification (makes you a Luke warm Christian) which Christ condemns to hell.

It does not necessarily work that way. I find it impossible to think that it would be absolutely impossible for people to love God as thoroughly as you think they should if they knew for sure that everything about him is true. There would certainly be many, most even, who do it for perceived rewards, but if there are people who submit entirely on the basis of faith, there would have to be people who would submit entirely on the basis of reason. If there was a verified God, it would make sense to do exactly as he wants, and for the reasons he wants it done. Indeed, it would make more sense to do it then, because you would have no reason to ever doubt it was the right thing to do.

---

What if God used a dream like anyother to show me? Why would all powerful God not be allowed to use common dreams to give revelations? the bible seems to think this is a legitimate avenue for God to use to communicate.

The question is, why would he bother using such an unreliable and vague method? If people can sent accurate communications through a hundred different methods, why can't God do better than dreams?

[Esquilax]

My example using death penalty crimes establishes that you are not an anti societal extremist. Like Osama bin Ladin, correct? Which makes you compliant or accepting of ALL the laws concerning death penalty crimes does it not? or again have you committed a death penalty level crime in open defiance of the western culture as Osama has? If yes please use this opportunity to claim your actions as Osama has completing the sociopaths pattern. if not then understand that you are willing subject to all laws concerning capital offenses. As such if Christ in his time here two thousand years ago established A verifiable open channel to heaven that scientist could test and approve as being the real deal. Then it would be safe to say our societies would look a lot different. Our laws would most likely reflect the laws the bible outlines as was the case in OT Judaism and in the dark ages when the Christian church ran the world into the ground.

First, and this may be nitpicking, but I'm not compliant to any death penalty crimes, because I come from, and am living in, a country that has no death penalty. And even if I were living in one that does have it, I wouldn't agree with it. I would, in fact, protest against it. See, that's the thing you don't seem to have gotten here: it's possible to disagree with a law without having to break it in order to demonstrate such. Maybe the fact that I haven't committed a capital offense has less to do with the fact that I secretly agree with the death penalty, and more to do with the fact that I'm not a psychopath and don't want to hurt someone.

But more than that, and forgive me if I'm wrong here, but weren't you the one earlier arguing that the new testament alters the laws of the old? Weren't you, in fact, arguing that Christ's new laws supersede the old testament completely? So... why would Christ's appearance change the world so much if he opened a channel to heaven in doing so? I mean, if the new testament reflects god's will now then wouldn't that still be the case if he were verifiable, and not encourage a dark ages style church?

Again because as you have demonstrated you do not have it in you to fight against the society's highest level offenses, and that you are willing to simply roll over and adopt what society has deemed to be 'moral'. It would stand to reason that you would have simply adopted societies standards even if some of the sins you enjoy now were elevated to capital crimes. Or again do you think yourself such a different person than the millions who lived and submitted themselves under church rule? In truth the only difference between you and some poor guy living 1500 years ago is the benefit of perspective that he provided by living in such terrible times. Without it you would not even question the life society had slated for you to live. As demonstrated by your current acceptance of all the major laws you dare not break.

The difference between me and a guy living 1500 years ago is that we now live in a free society (some might argue that's because it's a secular one) that has not only a right to a free discourse, but an expectation of a civil one. That's where your argument falls down: I don't just roll over and take whatever social standards there are. I protest, I sign petitions, I go to rallies and marches. I participate in awareness programs. And I refuse to participate in events, or involve myself with organizations or peoples that act in ways I consider harmful or offensive.

There are ways to disagree that aren't violent, no matter what the bible tells you.

[Cinjin]

The question is, why would he bother using such an unreliable and vague method? If people can sent accurate communications through a hundred different methods, why can't God do better than dreams?

exactly my point.
Why can't this "unchanging" god get out his bull horn and light up a bush once in awhile?

o that's right - because he's the cooked up justification for all things horrible. He's a poorly written, heavily plagiarized story that has only ever existed on paper. He's the creation of ancient dead sand farmers. He's a cliche. He's a left-over from a primitive's imagination. He's some goat herder's bad day in the desert. The reason why you're never going to hear about god writing on a wall or talking through a toaster oven in today's world is because people stopped writing that fiction a long time ago.

[downbeatplumb]

The question is, why would he bother using such an unreliable and vague method? If people can sent accurate communications through a hundred different methods, why can't God do better than dreams?

Dreams suck too.
I had a dream I was at a shooting range last night, but only got as far as the health and safety brief before my alarm clock went off.

[Drich]

It does not necessarily work that way. I find it impossible to think that it would be absolutely impossible for people to love God as thoroughly as you think they should if they knew for sure that everything about him is true. There would certainly be many, most even, who do it for perceived rewards, but if there are people who submit entirely on the basis of faith, there would have to be people who would submit entirely on the basis of reason. If there was a verified God, it would make sense to do exactly as he wants, and for the reasons he wants it done. Indeed, it would make more sense to do it then, because you would have no reason to ever doubt it was the right thing to do.

How does what you said differ from what I did?

The question is, why would he bother using such an unreliable and vague method? If people can sent accurate communications through a hundred different methods, why can't God do better than dreams?

To leave room for doubt. We have been told many times in scripture God prizes faith. If He removes all doubt before one has an oppertunity to show faith, then we will never be in a position to show our faith.

Christ said once we can show the faith of a mustard seed God will move the mountains (of doubt) before you. If you simply ask He do so in the name of knowing Christ.

---

First, and this may be nitpicking, but I'm not compliant to any death penalty crimes, because I come from, and am living in, a country that has no death penalty. And even if I were living in one that does have it, I wouldn't agree with it. I would, in fact, protest against it. See, that's the thing you don't seem to have gotten here: it's possible to disagree with a law without having to break it in order to demonstrate such. Maybe the fact that I haven't committed a capital offense has less to do with the fact that I secretly agree with the death penalty, and more to do with the fact that I'm not a psychopath and don't want to hurt someone.

Disagreeing with the law of God does not inturn mean one has sinned against God. I specifically chose the illustration of breaking the laws concerning capital crimes, and openly, rebelliously flaunting the fact that you have as the example. Because according to scripture this is what it is to sin against God. (Any sin, for all are capital crimes.) God has no law against pouting, mean you are allowed to protest till you get your fill and go home.

So again, If our laws reflected His, AS History as recorded twice in the course of man (Something you seem to not understand) The people (which would include you) fall in. unless they are they type to openly rebell which as we have established you are not.

But more than that, and forgive me if I'm wrong here, but weren't you the one earlier arguing that the new testament alters the laws of the old?

Noope. I have siad over and over nothing changes.

Weren't you, in fact, arguing that Christ's new laws supersede the old testament completely?

Nooope You must be turning to your own understanding of how christianity works.

So... why would Christ's appearance change the world so much if he opened a channel to heaven in doing so?

Again as history records when the people have absolute evidence of God As in the desert with the Jews they adopt and follow their understanding of God. Meaning God's law.

I mean, if the new testament reflects god's will now then wouldn't that still be the case if he were verifiable, and not encourage a dark ages style church?

Their is no division, If we are talking the legitmacy of the law. The whole law applies which means OT law applies. One more time; History has shown man's attempt to incorperate everything he can of God's laws into the law of the lands, in the two period where knoweledge of God was absolute..

The problem with that model? Man can not attone for sin as per the law of God. We only look at the thou shalts and the thou shalt nots. Man can only bind himself to works, as the law is by design impossiable to follow and meant to force one to seek attonement. Man can not attone for sin. This inturn forces man to "try harder" to live righteously when he can't, he turns to self righteousness if his pride will not allow him to admit his failure (which is coensidently what happens now in this culture) thus altering God's law allowing man to put an artifical grade on sin making the sins he likes the most less sinful as apposed to one most can abstain from making them more sinful thus calling for greater punishment (sound familiar yet?)
The turn to self righteousness rather than admiting one's own failure to keep the law and seek attonement, is what makes one a luke warm Christian. Meaning he is not saved according to Christ.

Despite the next arguement you are brewing up, understand and accept this has already happened twice in the history of man. NOTHING you can say will change this, And because we have already established you are a sheep of soceity, you need to admit to yourself that you would have just followed the heard like everyone else. That is not to say if someone lead a group off of the main flock you would not follow, but Jesus Christs and Martin Luthers (the two men that ended the two periods theocratic rule I am speaking of) don't come around every generation. that means for you, a life of grazing amonst your brothers understanding of 'morality.'

The difference between me and a guy living 1500 years ago is that we now live in a free society (some might argue that's because it's a secular one) that has not only a right to a free discourse, but an expectation of a civil one. That's where your argument falls down: I don't just roll over and take whatever social standards there are. I protest, I sign petitions, I go to rallies and marches. I participate in awareness programs. And I refuse to participate in events, or involve myself with organizations or peoples that act in ways I consider harmful or offensive.

aww kinda like the occupy wall street guys...

There are ways to disagree that aren't violent, no matter what the bible tells you.

Seriously? "Turn the other cheek.."

[Faith No More]

At the time I was pretty sure it was just a dream because it did not coincide with any of the examples of hell that I had heard of to that point in my life. Again I was raised with the Dante's inferno model. As I sought god out over the coming years and found what I had dreamed to be biblically accurate combining the accounts of Sheol (OT) and lake of fire (NT) I became convinced this was a message or Revelation from God.

How about now? Any doubt still remaining?

[Drich]

At the time I was pretty sure it was just a dream because it did not coincide with any of the examples of hell that I had heard of to that point in my life. Again I was raised with the Dante's inferno model. As I sought god out over the coming years and found what I had dreamed to be biblically accurate combining the accounts of Sheol (OT) and lake of fire (NT) I became convinced this was a message or Revelation from God.

How about now? Any doubt still remaining?

Asked and answered 3 or 4 times now.. Just enough to continue to refer to this whole thing as a dream/vision.

[Esquilax]

Noope. I have siad over and over nothing changes.

I am so glad you said that, Drich. Because the very first reply you ever wrote to me, back when I'd just started out in this forum, was this:

What is so hard to understand about how the bible was compiled? Two distinct religions are being repersented by one book. Anything OT was written to Old testament Jews. The New testament was written to Christianity.

This means if you are having a Christian conversation you must look between the Book of Matthew and the book of Jude to define Christian commands. As Leviticus is an OT book it those commands were written to OT Jews. Even Modern Jews do not follow all of those commands anymore.

So! Were you lying then, or were you lying just now? Either the rules regarding the bible changed, or they did not: when were you a hypocrite, here?

Nooope You must be turning to your own understanding of how christianity works.

Well, one of us certainly is...

Again as history records when the people have absolute evidence of God As in the desert with the Jews they adopt and follow their understanding of God. Meaning God's law.

Oh, so what makes their understanding of god "god's law" but mine some kind of flawed thing? Is it because I disagree with you? Or are you just making it up as you go along?

Despite the next arguement you are brewing up, understand and accept this has already happened twice in the history of man. NOTHING you can say will change this,

Wow, okay, apparently you don't get this: I'm an atheist. I don't think that anyone has ever had proof of the existence of god. Ever. I think that any historical period in which theocracies rule had more to do with humans lusting for power rather than divinity. And I also remember what ends theocracies: humans.

aww kinda like the occupy wall street guys...

Fuck off, you supercilious prick.

And in a less mean spirited way: nonviolent protest was enough for Ghandi, speeches were enough for Martin Luther King... the world can change through nonviolence, Drich.

Seriously? "Turn the other cheek.."

If you want to be a sociopathic thug who thinks violence is the only way to accomplish anything, fine. I suppose once again I've proven I'm morally more consistent and kind hearted than you.

What a surprise.