Calling it into question...

[popsthebuilder]

Judi lynn,  what do you mean?

One of you asked me to recount my interaction with the Lord. That is what I was saying to search for if interested. I doubt there will be much proof that is different from other things I have said. But maybe you'll get a better idea of where I'm coming from.

Pops, I'm curious why you have embraced the medieval reference of "lord" - which is actually a pretty oppressive power structure, if you think about it. It's also male-dominated language. Do you feel your understanding of Christianity is in line with an oppressive, male-dominated power structure? Or is that just habit?

Just to convey that any respectful name to reference the one God is acceptable I guess. Their all the same.

---

Drich, sorry for not answering the other questions in the post. I'll have to finish it here because I didn't want to create a ten mile long post.

So bear with me while I take your questions one by one.
Why to what? Why do I love calling things into question? Because I like investigating, challenging ideas and thoughts and I seek some answers in the form of verifiable proof - such as this topic.

we shall see how deeply you like to be challenged. I like to ask questions. and if you will honestly answer them, then at the very least you will gain a second perspective.

I don't support ISIS or it's ilk or their ideals either. Same with their religious views - twisted as they are. Do they need to be wiped from all power and possible threat - yes because they have demonstrated how evil they are by showing us proof (beheadings on video, shootings, bombings etc.) Their threat is real.

So now explain the difference between this and genocide?
Because ISIS is not a legitimate state where certain members within a given boarder hold a given ideals. (which subsequently means there are those with in the same boarder who do not) It is a movement that encompasses/envelopes all of it's members. This includes women and children. So to purge ISIS one has to Purge the VAST MAJORITY of it's followers before it ceases to be a threat. to purge is to kill because they have escalated it to that point. Movements like this are a cancer. If you just remove the tumor (kill the current army) it does not mean you removed this cancer from the world. like cancer you have to remove the vast majority of active cancer cells otherwise it will indeed come back.

But, don't look now, if you are seeking to remove ISIS from power you are supporting genocide. Again because ISIS is not a legitmate state it is an ideal that infects men women and children, those who have the ISIS cancer will continue to spread it till they kill the host, or be killed by the host.

The Abrahamic god has made threats to his own people in the bible, but since no one can prove he actually exists, personally, I don't find his threats credible to me. I don't believe that there is an eternal damnation waiting for those who don't bow down and obey.

Stay on topic.. Stay on topic.. (Imagine a MEME) with Gold leader saying that in an x-wing..
The purpose of the ISIS example was to show that 'we' can be forced into a situation where genocide is an acceptable recourse. (IF you don't like the ISIS example look at what 'we' did to Japan at the end of WWII) for the same reason. (We fire bombed/targeted the civialian population intentionally to break the will of the people. because like ISIS every man woman and child will be fighting against us.)

:Roflol: Do you support abortion?

I support a woman's right to choose. It's her body. This is especially true in a life threatening situation, where if the choice has to be made to save her life or that of her unborn child, then she should be the one to make that call.

Again whether you prefer the greek or English word for baby, you are still killing them. But in the OP God is judged as wicked for authorizing the destruction of babies.

I like to ask people who judge God evil for having babies killed yet support abortion, How many 'babies do you think were 'dashed against the rocks or were literally put to the sword in his name?' a few hundred? a 1000, 10,000 a 1,000,000? Now how many dead babies does your support stand behind?
how about 1.3 billion since 1980?

If a loving God is there to receive 1000 babies He ordered put to death, and can either welcome them into Heaven or plug them back in to non hate filled families for another chance at life, where is the harm?

Now ask yourself who do we have to 'receive' the 1.3 billion we slaughtered?

The God is a baby killer argument is an example Hyprocrisy and self righteousness that has taken control of empty mind.
http://www.numberofabortions.com/

??? The only thing He says you can't eat is what you think it is a sin to eat... What are you talking about?

Unclean meat - cloven hoof, shellfish, can't mix meat with cheese etc. Leviticus explains this.

You do understand that these laws speak to those in a completely different religion right? Christian's are not OT Jews. Matter of fact we have been told in the book of Acts that for a Christian there are no 'unclean foods.'

Do you not understand the term covet? It means to long or lust after your (alive) neighbor's wife.

Perhaps I don't and I'm willing to admit that error. But it was supposed to go along with the following example I cited in that what I was referring to was that while you can't "long" after your neighbor's wife, you can take your brother's wife as your own.

again one HAD an obligation to marry said brother's wife only if he died. So save the brother's family from going into slavery or death.

Point made, however, do you think that the Abrahamic god would still approve of a man taking his brother's wife (after brother dies), in this day and age?

If the situation was the same no, not at all.

What about what the bible says about divorce?

How is it that you donot understand the key element here is the 'brother's death.'
Or maybe you do not understand that in the vows we take before God that we are obligated to our spouces so long as we live. Hence the phrase "Till death do we part." Meaning our bond to our spouce is until death. Jesus Himself speak of this when He was asked about a woman who married several brothers that died.

I do not see any Christians rising up in arms about the high divorce rate in this country.

Then you haven't looked. just a few days ago I pointed out that the divorce rate among Christians in the US was inflated and then provided acouple links to support what was said.

God's Home is creation. ALL Of It. You and anyone who does not want to spend eternity in the service of God is 'ISIS'. Why should God force us (Christians) to spend eternity fighting the rest of you? Hell is the one place 'we' (Christians) are not.

Calling everyone who does not believe in god, ISIS, is really harsh and not true at all.

Take it up with God. I simply put what He does call you into a modern metaphore. Jesus Himself see us as Sheep or Goats, Wheat or Weeds, Wheat or Chaff, Sheep or wolves, Sons of God Sons of Satan/evil... Christ does not mince words, and He draws a very sharp line between those who desire to serve God for eternity and those who do not. I simply put his words in a frame work easy for us to understand. If you do not like being viewed by God as you would view a member of ISIS then change it. seek attonement.

According to the Christian free will argument, your god isn't forcing you to fight me or ISIS or anyone

.... And where in the bible does it even mention the term or principles of 'Christian free will?' Hint* It doesn't ever mention it. Matter of fact it says the oppsite. It says we are slaves to sin, but if we die with Christ then the laws that identify sin no longer bound us. We only have only one real choice. that is whether or not to accept redemption or not.

Don't join the military and you won't be taking the chance on getting sent overseas to fight people like that. As far as fighting me - the only thing we have a differing of is religion and the issues surrounding it. For all I know, you might love Italian food. I make Italian food. That right there would be something we'd agree on. Not everything has to be a fight. I've had to learn to pick and choose my battles carefully in my real life. Some things are just not worth fighting over.

For how long? How long do you think our mutual love for itialian food keep us from fighting? a year, a decade, a life time, a eon? You do know eternity is quite a bit longer than any measure of time any of us can really phathom. So again how long do you think we could be friends when you see me as God's little golden boy who gets whatever wonderful thing God is going to give us?
How long before the jelousy leads to anger[i]. "Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering?”

This is EXACTLY what happened to Lucifer. He was God's #1 servant/angel, but was angered with the treatment God was giving man. So how many billions of years do you think will pass before there is all out war? (kinda already happen once, why would God let it happen again?)

There are thousands of children in our own country, not just other countries, who are starving because their parents make too much money to qualify for assistance, but make not quite enough to pay all the bills. When it comes down to being forced to pay out your ass for mandatory healthcare or be fined (read: taxed) for refusal to having it, and whether or not you can make your utility payment or buy food for your kids - then there's a problem. And it's a problem the government created. But if god was real - he has the power to do something about it.

Again wicked servant issue. not a God issue. If this were a God issue then we could not grow food anywhere. But as it is did you know that our farmers are paid not to plant certain crops because it would drive the price of said crop down too low?
If their is hunger in the world it is the fault of man as a product of his greed, not an issue with God. For God has given us enough to feed everyone several times over!

Furthermore, in countries were there are droughts, where the river beds have been dry for years, where they once were full of life, if god were real, he could easily make it rain and fill up the rivers once again.

Again why when HE has given so many so much to feed the earth several times over?
Think about it, are you really saying that a country who throws away 165 billion dollars of food a year is not in the least responsible for trying to redirect that unwanted food to those in need? That God must make every country like this one where we all thow out a surplus of food.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/21...19340.html
In what mind is that logical?

demand that God make everyone over produce so that no one has to share...

No, that not how it works.. to those who have been given much. Much is expected in return.

What makes you think science and medicine means God is not at work? Are you so foolish to think that God can only work in the unexplainable? If so where did you get that idea?

Science is not god and god is not science.

Book chapter and verse please..
God is the creator of the NATURAL Universe. Science is the Explaination of How that universe works. Therefore Science is man's attempt to describe the process and ways God accomplishes what He has done.
Sorry Sport, just because we figured out how to lable what god does, doesn't mean God hasn't done it..

Have you heard my 'preacher story' of the three mice and the master pianist?

If that were the case, we would have irrefutable proof of his existence.

That's the thing isn't. Nothing is truly irrefutable, because anyone can shift the goal posts in such away to refute what is known.

Instead, we get people selling Jesus toast on Ebay for $20,000 because "it's a sign." No.. a real sign would be the example I've cited. THAT would be a real, provable miracle, which could be documented.

Miracles are documented all the time, but it doesn't mean people believe them. Matter of fact they are document so much they has to be reclassified in the medical community so as to (move the goal post) and not give acknowledgement to God. They refer to miracles as 'anomalies.'
What was once considered as irrefutable proof, has been disputed and simply renamed so it can be dismissed. You people don't want proof. you want control of God/make the rules or try and contain God so you may live how you want.

If you wanted true proof of God you would simply A/s/k for it as He has instructed.

The Native American Indians didn't believe in the Abrahamic god prior to the British coming over here. Yet the NI medicine men and women, (doctors, if you must) used herbs, cannabis, leaves, tree bark etc to heal their sick. That had nothing to do with god.

Just because they did not know the God of Abraham does not mean they did not know God. If you knew anything about the the medical practices of 'the people' you would know all of their 'science' was spirit/God based.

In what capacity can a horrid disease such as cancer be used as a tool to strengthen or grow any understanding and faith of any god? To say that cancer or an incurable/deadly disease is an effective tool, is tantamount to saying that god gave you that cancer or that deadly disease because you either sinned, or didn't believe in him, so therefore,you must be punished a slow, torturous and painful death that will eat you from the inside out.

Those are not tools of compassion or love. If they are god's tools, he's a cruel and hateful god.

Soo.. is it better to suffer now for a few years and live in eternal bliss in your opinion or is it better to live a pampered life for 100 years and be sentenced to Hell?

Pampering people and giving them everything they want literally spoils them, by spoil I mean to make rotten, to die spiritually. A hardship like cancer can do one of two things. First if you feel you or a loved one are entitled to 100 years of pampering it will make you turn on God. or two something like cancer will quickly put you into a position where you and 'science' is completely powerless. so much so that you know that any 'anomaly' whether it be spiritual or physical can only come from God.

Cancer and things like it are the heat, hammer and anvil that God uses to forge us from soft iron ore, into high tempered steel. When you truly know God you no longer fear His ways. It's only when life becomes about the right to be spoiled and to spoil others (To make rotten/spirutally dead) that any threat to that entitled 100 years easy life span you feel your owed becomes an affront to basic human rights.

Again it is better to suffer for a few years than be sentenced to Hell/live in eternity at 1/2 the potential you could have aspired to.

How do you find the patience to speak so clearly when the subject matter is so close to heart? Congrats again.

Seriously though. Any advice?

---

Why?
In this day and age given the threats by ISIS, Al Qaeda, and the like, can you not ever see a reason to wipe your deep seated enemy from all power and possible threat?
If God truly gave us the power to not choose Him, then the other extreme (deep dark evil) has the opportunity to ingrain itself into a person or even a whole society of people.

Fair warning, everyone, this post is kind of long.

---

Who says the opposite of Jehovah is deep, dark evil (besides your bible, of course)? For all you know, Jehovah is the evil one, and that's why he had to make sure the bible constantly reminds us that he's good. The bible repeatedly tells us Jehovah is good, but if all those passages were gone and you looked strictly at his actions, would you still say he's good?  Even if we leave out slavery, after all the ordering and condoning of genocide, rape, infanticide; after all the instances of jealousy, rage, and hate; after annihilating virtually all human, plant, and animal life on Earth; and after all the other reprehensible suffering god has allegedly inflicted on humanity in his "holiness," is Jehovah really good, or is that just what the bible says about him to make you ignore the awful shit he does? Hmmm...


Furthermore...you realize that both ISIS and Al Qaeda have chosen god, right? Both of those factions are primarily comprised of muslims whose Abrahamic god has the same mythical origins as your own. You'd probably be inclined to say that Allah isn't the same god as Jehovah or that he doesn't exist at all, but Muslims could turn around and easily say the same thing about Jehovah, and you would both be powerless to prove each other wrong because neither of you has evidence of your claim. Besides, considering what murderous monsters both of those gods are on paper, it's far more likely that they're the same god than that they aren't.

Again as I have pointed out in the last slave thread, the definition of slavery has changed over the millennia. God's definition included paid servants and indentured servants as well as your definition, but with restrictions your definition does not include. But, the self righteous of this generation does not want to consider the truth of the matter only that God has violated their anti hot topic doctrines.

I feel like I'm gonna be starting a lot of these counters with the phrase, "You do realize..."


You do realize (or perhaps not) that "indentured servant" is another way of saying "debt slave," right? It's still a form of slavery, and it still violates human rights. Historically speaking, many indentured servants spent the rest of their lives in servitude, unable to work off their debt often because their owners would add to it arbitrarily.


And you're right, the Bible does have some laws about slavery. I'm guessing you think these "restrictions" improved the quality of the slaves' lives. Let's look at a few of those from Exodus 21 (English Standard Version was the first to pop up in my search, so I'll roll with it):

Verses 2-6: "When you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing. If he comes in single, he shall go out single; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out alone. But if the slave plainly says, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free,’ then his master shall bring him to God, and he shall bring him to the door or the doorpost. And his master shall bore his ear through with an awl, and he shall be his slave forever."

This means that if a Hebrew man is bought as a slave, he can't keep his wife with him when he's freed unless they were bought together. If they weren't bought together, the only way to keep the family together is for the man to give up his freedom forever. Right there is a situation where the god you serve condones splitting up a family as long as the members are slaves, and the only way for the husband to prevent this is to agree to become a slave for life. Notice, also, that the passage says nothing of freeing female or child slaves...only adult men. What a kind version of slavery this is.

Verses 7-11: “When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. If she does not please her master, who has designated her for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has broken faith with her. If he designates her for his son, he shall deal with her as with a daughter. If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights. And if he does not do these three things for her, she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money.

At first glance, this passage probably looks like it's protecting the rights of slave girls with whom their masters are not "pleased" (I think we all know what that means), but I'd like to point out a few things. For one, this passage governs the prospect of a man selling his own daughter into sexual slavery (don't even fuck with me on this point, we all know what it means to "please" a man, and the bible writers knew, too...I will go preacher's kid on your ass with some biblical Hebrew if you really want to open that bag of dicks and start sucking).


I realize this practice of selling one's own daughter into whoredom is still common in parts of the world, but that doesn't stop it from being completely despicable and a broad violation of very basic human rights. There's also the caveat at the end, which states that if the slave isn't properly cared for, she will be set free without having to buy her freedom. This might seem like a boon, but effectively it gives masters license to simply turn loose female slaves they're not pleased with. As you've stated elsewhere in your post, a lone woman (especially a former slave) would have practically no option but to sell herself back into slavery or die. What a kind version of slavery this is.

Verses 20-21: “When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged. But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, for the slave is his money.

So this is another passage that seems to protect the slaves but actually condones their mistreatment, in this case the mistreatment being actual murder. According to this passage, a man will be slain if he kills a slave by striking him with a rod...unless the slave doesn't die right away. As long as he or she lasts a good "day or two" (why the vagueness, Lord?), the master is in the clear. Bottom line: the bible lets you get away with killing your slaves by beating them to death with a stick. What a kind version of slavery this is.

Verses 26-27: “When a man strikes the eye of his slave, male or female, and destroys it, he shall let the slave go free because of his eye. If he knocks out the tooth of his slave, male or female, he shall let the slave go free because of his tooth.

Yet another passage pretending to be a protection and actually being something else: this time it's instructions how how specifically to beat your slaves. Knocking out their eyes and teeth is a no-no that will lose you a slave, so avoid the face with that punishment stick and remember to leave them just alive enough to not die for at least a day. What a kind version of slavery this is


There's a host of rules like this in that passage, and I don't really feel the need to list every single one. I'm sure you get the idea (or maybe you don't)

:Roflol: Do you support abortion? 

Come on, dude. Nobody supports abortion. Even supporting a woman's right to choose isn't supporting abortion...just human rights. Before you go telling me that a fetus is a human, I'd like to point out that science says otherwise; that up to a certain point in pregnancy, the embryo does not physiologically qualify as a human being. Furthermore, my moral character dictates that (in most cases) the rights of an actual, live human supersede the rights of a potential, unborn human. Without the bible, prove me wrong. I'll wait.

??? The only thing He says you can't eat is what you think it is a sin to eat... What are you talking about?

Ummm...kosher laws, dumbass? Shellfish? Pork? ANY animal that does not both chew a cud and have cloven hooves? Ringing any bells?


And before you go trying to tell me that Jehovah rescinded kosher laws during Peter's vision in Acts, remember that passage expressly states that this vision represents the divine cleaning of the gentiles, not the actual food from the dream. Some also read the abolishment of kosher laws into it, but the passage doesn't actually say that, and to read that into it is speculation.

Do you not understand the term covet? It means to long or lust after your (alive) neighbor's wife.

Do you not understand that coveting is a thought crime, and that thought crime has no place in practical morality? Your god is worse than the NSA.

Do you know what would have happened to the widow if the brother did not marry her and have a son with her? Remember she did not live in modern western society. Meaning no welfare, no rights after the husband died, no way to support her family. So she would have to turn to slavery, or she would have died, and her husband's lands/holding would be lost to her and any young children.
To marry your dead brother's wife was the way that ancient society supported widows and their children.

Refusing to marry his brother's wife is not what Onan was punished for. Onan did marry his brother's wife, and he took care of her for the rest of his life (which, admittedly, was not long). His specific sin was pulling out during sex so she wouldn't get pregnant. God killed a man for pulling out with his wife. Why aren't I dead yet? After all, the bible states clearly that children are the "lord's reward," so any action that willfully prevents conception is worthy of death by the logic here. You might say that he was punished for disobeying god, but why the disproportionate punishment? You're telling me raping a virgin gets you a slap on the wrist and a new wife, but pulling out while fucking your wife gets you killed? What the fuck?


Another fun fact about Onan and his brother's wife: by putting Onan to death, he was just making a widow of her all over again, which clearly indicates that he cares more for being obeyed than he does for tending to a widow's needs. Gee, what an awesome and benevolent god.

So.. Let's say a Member of ISIS who hates all Westerners and anything not ISIS Muslim would die a terrible death IF you did not take Him/Them into your house. Now keep in mind once in your house they have full intention of killing you and your family, taking your house and possessions and turning them over to their want, will and cause. Now the question is, do you invite them in to your home?

I realize this is supposed to be hypothetical, but it's a terrible hypothetical. This situation makes it pretty clear that I am this person's enemy, so why would he be trying to seek refuge in my house? Presumably it's my country's military that's after him. Such a person would likely try to simply kill me and seize my house rather than asking to be invited in and then killing me.


Let's entertain this hypothetical anyway, though, since it's so easy to pick apart. If you go to scripture, it's obvious what Jesus would do...he would turn the other cheek, let the guy in, and he and his family would get killed. If I were a christian who were trying to legitimately be christ-like, I would have no other option but to let my enemy in the door.


Jesus always said things like, "Bless your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you," and, "Whatever you do for the least of these you do for me...and whatever you do not do for the least of these, you also do not do for me." For all you know, that muslim at your door is actually Jesus seeing if you'll let him in, and by slamming the door in his face you're signing your lease in hell. Ever think of it that way? Probably not.

God's Home is creation. ALL Of It. You and anyone who does not want to spend eternity in the service of God is 'ISIS'. Why should God force us (Christians) to spend eternity fighting the rest of you? Hell is the one place 'we' (Christians) are not.

Ummm...you do realize that ISIS refers to a specific organization of muslim extremists, and that the people you're talking to on this forum are mostly atheists, right? How the fuck do you generate the logic that lands all non-christians in ISIS?

That's not true at all. God has provided a surplus of food in the west, and has commanded us (in the west/those with) to distribute it. This is not a God issue, this is a wicked servant issue. If it were a God issue then their would just flat out not be enough food.

The point is that an all-powerful god shouldn't need human help to end world hunger. Exodus describes magic food falling from the sky at various points so the people wouldn't starve while roaming the desert. What, does he just not do that shit any more? Why is it that when nobody is around with good documentation, god decides to roll up his sleeves and spray magic all over our face and hair in monumentally grand fashion, but the second empiricism shows up he suddenly quits that shit? For that matter, why is he so much more subtle with his magic in the New Testament than he was in the Old? Is he running out of magic points? Is that why he stopped doing miracles and updating the bible?

What makes you think science and medicine means God is not at work? Are you so foolish to think that God can only work in the unexplainable? If so where did you get that idea?

What about science and medicine makes you think God is at work? Everything about them is influenced by physical forces than can be accounted for, and there is no evidence to suggest that anything other than plain science has ever had a hand in healing people's illnesses and injuries. Before you start, faith healing (at least outside the pages of your myths) isn't a thing. There is not one documented case of a successful faith healing. The James Randi foundation, for one, has been looking for years and offering money to anyone who can prove it. Every time they investigate such a claim, they can either find no evidence the person was ever actually sick in a way that time and placebo wouldn't treat, or they find that the person is still gravely ill with whatever they had to begin with and have simply stopped going to the doctor because they think Jesus healed them. People who rely on faith healing die. Parents who take terminal children to faith healers instead of doctors are murderers. If you think otherwise, the facts simply disagree with you.

Cancer and 'other deadly diseases' are or can be tools God uses to strengthen and grow our understanding and faith. Why would He remove such an effective tool?

Because he's supposed to be all-powerful, he should be able to use any tool he wants (or no tools at all), and he's supposed to be all loving, so he should be able to choose a tool that doesn't bring us suffering. This whole "God's plan works in mysterious ways" argument is one of the most infuriating claims forwarded by theists because it's such a copout answer. The fact is your omnipresent, omnipotent, omni-benevolent god stands near and watches every atrocity on earth without so much as twitching a divine finger.


Put yourself in those shoes for a minute. Let's say your only daughter, whom you desperately love, is horrendously and painfully sick. Let's say that she's not terminal and could get better with time, but it will be emotionally and physically costly as well as painful and lengthy. On the other hand, there is a quick, easy, painless cure for her problem that is well within your means. If you cure her, you will deprive her of the hardship she would have gone through, and therefore the opportunity to build character from it; however, you are also all-knowing and all-powerful, and are therefore easily able to find another way for her to build character. What do you do?



If your answer is anything other than, "Cure my daughter immediately and find some other way for her to build character," then you do not love your daughter, no matter what you say, and also, fuck you.

---

You do know that Isis is an extremist group right. They are taking extreme action to right the wrongs of man. They may be going about it the wrong way and on perhaps the wrong front. They are surely manipulated by man in some fashion. Not God.