Bald Prophets are Dangerous

[Brakeman]

What if.. God did not opperate the way you think He does or should. Think about it Being almighty, is He somehow obligated to be the god you have created to fit your idea of morality? What if your morality was actually preverse ..

Gee, Genesis 3:5 Says:

3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

Was god lying there? Dis man's knowledge of morality not equal god's morality as stated in the verse? Did you delete it from your bible?

While you spin your apologetic's encoder ring on that one, answer too why consistency with self portion of analyzing god's purported word is something to be tossed away as needed?

[Esquilax]

What if.. God did not opperate the way you think He does or should. Think about it Being almighty, is He somehow obligated to be the god you have created to fit your idea of morality? What if your morality was actually preverse ..

Gee, Genesis 3:5 Says:

3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

Was god lying there? Dis man's knowledge of morality not equal god's morality as stated in the verse? Did you delete it from your bible?

While you spin your apologetic's encoder ring on that one, answer too why consistency with self portion of analyzing god's purported word is something to be tossed away as needed?

Is anyone else sort of getting the feeling that Drich's only argument is the bog standard "god moves in mysterious ways" with an added dose of smugness? Why is it he seems to be the only one to have any kind of line to god? Pretty interesting...

[Brakeman]

Well, he doesn't see the problem with his postulate. If god did give us morals to judge right and wrong and they were defective, we couldn't be held responsible when they failed, nor could we be held responsible in no longer following a defective indicator. Our morals must be perfect if they are god given. If they are not god given, then the bible lies and we are held to the brink of hell's eternal torture on the morals that we have to make up ourselves.

It's just a big fuzzy role of nonsense.

[RichardP]

Well, he doesn't see the problem with his postulate. If god did give us morals to judge right and wrong and they were defective, we couldn't be held responsible when they failed, nor could we be held responsible in no longer following a defective indicator. Our morals must be perfect if they are god given. If they are not god given, then the bible lies and we are held to the brink of hell's eternal torture on the morals that we have to make up ourselves.

It's just a big fuzzy role of nonsense.

Yes but it is not the definite to "Christians". The Christians cannot be reasoned with that easily..

The Christians have their schizophrenic "relationship" with "Jesus" to determine what is "good" or "bad" or "right" or "wrong" -- so even if the Bible isn't perfect their schizophrenia will point them in the correct direction!!

Like the popular bumper stickers "No religion..Just a relationship"...

[Drich]

Gee, Genesis 3:5 Says:

3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

Was god lying there? Dis man's knowledge of morality not equal god's morality as stated in the verse? Did you delete it from your bible?

While you spin your apologetic's encoder ring on that one, answer too why consistency with self portion of analyzing god's purported word is something to be tossed away as needed?

Is anyone else sort of getting the feeling that Drich's only argument is the bog standard "god moves in mysterious ways" with an added dose of smugness? Why is it he seems to be the only one to have any kind of line to god? Pretty interesting...

Show me. where have I ever once defaulted to "God works in mysterious ways?" I have gone through great pains to explain what you believe to be the great mystery of God.

This is the second or third time you have defaulted to a standard Christian arguement when refering to me. I ask the before you try and make another foolish sweeping generalization, that you do you due dilligence and find some quotes to back up what you have said.

---

Well, he doesn't see the problem with his postulate. If god did give us morals to judge right and wrong and they were defective, we couldn't be held responsible when they failed, nor could we be held responsible in no longer following a defective indicator. Our morals must be perfect if they are god given. If they are not god given, then the bible lies and we are held to the brink of hell's eternal torture on the morals that we have to make up ourselves.

It's just a big fuzzy role of nonsense.

Or perhaps it is you who does not acknoweledge the ever declining nature of morality. Morality is on a downward sliding scale, and what passes as 'morality' today would not be considered 'moral' just a generation ago. The reason we even bother to move the bar lower and justify our 'new' morality is because we see and acknoweledge the difference between Good and evil, so we justify what we do by changing our standard of righteousness. This Change is identified by Christ as Self Righteousness. (If you want some scripture Please Ask and I can give you what Christ had to say about that.)

---

What if.. God did not opperate the way you think He does or should. Think about it Being almighty, is He somehow obligated to be the god you have created to fit your idea of morality? What if your morality was actually preverse ..

Gee, Genesis 3:5 Says:

3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

Was god lying there? Dis man's knowledge of morality not equal god's morality as stated in the verse? Did you delete it from your bible?

While you spin your apologetic's encoder ring on that one, answer too why consistency with self portion of analyzing god's purported word is something to be tossed away as needed?

your confused. Or intentionally trying to confuse the subject. God did not give us the power to decide for our selves what is right and wrong in Genesis 3. He simply said we will know the difference between right and wrong "like gods" (Little g and plural) Meaning to include Angels and Demons. Demons also know the difference between right and wrong as per gen 3 but have no say in the identification or classification between right and wrong. Neither do any of us.

[Minimalist]

I guess I will have to take you off my Christmas card list now.

Good. Save the environment from another stupid ass custom.

[Brakeman]

Well, he doesn't see the problem with his postulate. If god did give us morals to judge right and wrong and they were defective, we couldn't be held responsible when they failed, nor could we be held responsible in no longer following a defective indicator. Our morals must be perfect if they are god given. If they are not god given, then the bible lies and we are held to the brink of hell's eternal torture on the morals that we have to make up ourselves.

It's just a big fuzzy role of nonsense.

Or perhaps it is you who does not acknoweledge the ever declining nature of morality. Morality is on a downward sliding scale, and what passes as 'morality' today would not be considered 'moral' just a generation ago. ..


your confused. Or intentionally trying to confuse the subject. God did not give us the power to decide for our selves what is right and wrong in Genesis 3. He simply said we will know the difference between right and wrong "like gods" (Little g and plural) Meaning to include Angels and Demons. Demons also know the difference between right and wrong as per gen 3 but have no say in the identification or classification between right and wrong. Neither do any of us.

DODGE! or giving you the benefit of the doubt.. you are confused. I was referring to the "Magic gift" of a god quality sense of right and wrong as I quoted in Genesis 3.5. If our sense of right and wrong is degradable, it wouldn't be biblically god given. If we choose to "ignore" what our god given sense of right and wrong tells us, then that is an entirely different subject and that topic would be a dodge of the original conversation.

You postulated that god behavior could be good even when it disagrees with man's judgment of right or wrong (morality). I showed that this could not be the case because according to the bible, god gave us a god level sense of right and wrong.

[Drich]

DODGE! or giving you the benefit of the doubt.. you are confused.

I find myself wanting to use words like dummy and stupid right now. I am sorry that i am already here if you are honestly trying to understand. But starting your post out by mindlessly accusing me of being confused simply because I made the same observation about you, is 'button pushing' especially when have not sighted anything to support your accusation.

I was referring to the "Magic gift" of a god quality sense of right and wrong as I quoted in Genesis 3.5.

(this is the part where i want to desperatly call you a dummy.)
Look _______, Genesis 3:5 is apart of a larger contextual message. It starts at verse. If you have to take it out of context/cherry pick to make an arguement, then know your arguement failed long before you posted it.

Here is how it failed:

3 but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.’”

4 Then the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. 5 For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

6 So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings.

After they ate of the fruit verse 7 full fills what verse 5 described. They knew they sinned and as a result made covering for themselves out of fig leaves. The following verses describe what i was saying about self righteousness or the justification of sin:

8 And they heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden.

9 Then the Lord God called to Adam and said to him, “Where are you?”

10 So he said, “I heard Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; and I hid myself.”

11 And He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you that you should not eat?”

12 Then the man said, “The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I ate.”

These verses shows Adam's deviation from God's righteousness to his own personal Brand of righteousness/self-righteousness/Morality.

For God's Stated righteousness said it is never ok to Eat of the tree of knoweledge. Adam's new found morality said "It's ok to eat from the tree because "the woman God gave me tricked me."

So again What God said about the tree was absolutly true, and the message of self righteousness or downward sliding morality is also true as Adam tried to justify his sin with what he felt (and what some of you even argue) was a legit reason for sin, making him 'morally right in his own eyes.' Even so Adam nor do we have the ablity to change the status of sin. Even if we justify it by making it moral to our own selves. (Again, the fact that we try and 'morally justify sin' prooves that we know what we did was wrong, other why the suplmentary justification?)

[Cinjin]

wow if this is what you believe Christianity to be, in any way shape or form no wonder your pissed.

---

What if.. God did not opperate the way you think He does or should. Think about it Being almighty, is He somehow obligated to be the god you have created to fit your idea of morality? What if your morality was actually preverse when compared to an absolute standard? should the real God set His expressed will aside to support your personal sense of righteousness? Is this what you believe to be "unconditional love?" If yes then doesn't that make you god? After all if their is one being that the God of creation bows down to, and has your will superceed his own, then doesn't that make you the supream authority in the universe?

---

If your god then WTF?!? why do you let bad things happen to 'good people?' why haven't i won the lottery yet? where is your unconditional love? "I can love my kids without condition why haven't yoou shown me the same level of love I am able to show my own kids?" What kind of half ass god are you? there are kids with cancer, babies being born with aids, and on and on and on...

I'm going to put the most important part of my response in large BOLD print, so that you can attempt to grasp what it is I've explained to you over and over and over again you filthy fucking apologist:
First of all, many many many christians consider the entire human race "children of god." Just because some uneducated peon like yourself claims that only he personally is a child of god - doesn't mean jack shit.

Secondly, now pay attention: Even if I allowed you your dirty excuse about how your god doesn't love us because we haven't subliminally accepted his shitty conditional gift, it in no way excuses his actions and sure as fuck doesn't validate your analogy of your own kids. You want to know why it doesn't? Because even if I don't have unconditional love for your children, I'm still not going to BURN them for all fucking eternity! That's the fucking difference!

Your make-believe god doesn't love me. Fine, no problem. I myself don't love most of the world either. Guess what?! I'm still not going to burn your children with a blowtorch or deny them access to happiness because they never fucking heard of me!

Fuck your stupid god damn analogy. God damn christards. Jesus fucking christ.

{Learn to spell or at least do a fucking proofread and I might consider responding (or maybe even reading) the rest of the idiocy inside the Hide boxes.}

---

Now if by some crazy reason God does not bow down to your will nor will He change into the god you have created to fit your personal righteousness. And if He is indeed an unchanging standard but you seem far from even the most basic understanding of Him, then maybe it is you who has drifted away from God.

Ever been fishing in an intercoastal water way? It's usally salt water like the oceans, and subject to the tides. Just no major swells. When one is in an unanchored boat and not paying attention to the scenery one can litteraly drift for miles and not think he has move but a few feet. Some family and I were shrimping off port canaveral with in view of the Vehical assembly building (VAB)at Kennedy space center. (Shrimp run at night) so we spent most of the time looking down at our lights in the water dipping our nets in to catch the shrimp as they ran with the currents. with in an hour we had drifted almost 4 miles from where we were. But for the 3 of us our scenery had not changed or rather our imediate perspective did not change. we were looking at a small patch of illuminated water, and the interrior of the boat, but when we looked up what was once a side lit massive building had all but disappeared.

God is the unmoving VAB in this story(Again His Standard of Righteousness has never changed.) and the drifting boat is our collective moralities or personal sense of righteousness/self righteousness. Meaning if we look up from our heads down view of the boat, and small patch of water we are in, and God seem very far away, then we should have sense enough to know it is not God who has moved. It is our ever declining sense of morality. the fact that you feel tremoundous rage for a perceived injustice, but can over look what you deem to be minor sins should be a giant red flag.

If it isn't then just know God is not going to "uproot the VAB" and chase you down with the wandering tide. (God is not going to change His righteousness to match your ever changing morality) If you want to be close to God you will have to fire up the boat motor and set a course back from where you came. Otherwise know it is you who has left the side of God, and the fact that your 'righteousness' gives you an oppertunity to be morally outraged at God should be a confirmation that your righteousness and God's righteousness are not the same... Now all one has to do is look at what Christ said about the self righteous to complete this study. Is that something you want to look at?

---

[Esquilax]

Show me. where have I ever once defaulted to "God works in mysterious ways?" I have gone through great pains to explain what you believe to be the great mystery of God.

This is the second or third time you have defaulted to a standard Christian arguement when refering to me. I ask the before you try and make another foolish sweeping generalization, that you do you due dilligence and find some quotes to back up what you have said.

Well, okay: you and I both know you've never used those exact words. You don't have the level of introspection required to resort to a cliche.

But whenever you state two contradictory premises and attribute them both to god, that's what you're essentially saying. Whenever you claim god has a perfect morality despite his murdering, genocidal ways, this is saying that he "works in mysterious ways."

That's me drilling down to the core of your (non) argument.