Man's morality

[genkaus]

No. For your arguement to work I have to interperate what is plainly written in scripture. No interpertation is needed. It is clearly defined.
Christ himself limits the terms and conditions of Christianity in mat 7.
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

Christ clearly draws a line between True Christians and those who only think their Christians.

Again No interppertation needed When Christ the founder of this religion makes a clear cut division between 'A true Christian' and one who goes through the motions.

Thank you for laying out the detailed, step-by-step generation of your particular brand of No True Scotsman fallacy.

First of all, there is no reason to assume that whatever crap is written in your Bible can be validly considered as a criteria for a "True Christian" - much less what is written in Mat 7.

Second of all, in the absence of the words "here are the terms and conditions for being a True Christian", there is no indication that the verses you quoted are meant to draw the line between True and False Christians - that is your subjective interpretation. The only thing a literal interpretation tells here is who can't enter Heaven - and even that is not made very clear.

Third of all, and quite interestingly, I might add, literal interpretation of this verse undercuts the point you've been making all along - that your god's morality is not based on works. Here, your Christ asks people to do god's will and speaks against those who practice lawlessness - clearly, he regards your works as the criteria for entering heaven. Its just that those works don't happen to include prophesying in his name or casting out demons or doing wonders.

Then why isn't the majorty of christianity practiced this way? look at catholicism, it is works based. It claims to be the orginal version of Christianity. If it is as you say, and christianity was based in a 'works free enviorment' to attract members then why was their a focous on works for 2/3's of the church's history?

You miss the point - the whole works-free propaganda is only to attract followers. Once you become a follower, the religion has to milk you for all you are worth, which means, shifting the focus back on works. This is just one of the many fundamental contradictions within Christianity.

It's not a loaded question because One can identify the act of murder without making a moral judgement. The fact that every culture considers murder a crime is irrelevant. The reason you need to classify this as a loaded question is because it disproves your assertion that man act's are netural in the sight of other men.

Actually, that wasn't my assertion.

If you think you can identify an act of murder without a moral judgement then go ahead and try.

The reason you can't is because the definition of murder that you appeal to is "unjustified killing". The reason you appeal to this definition is because that is the only way you can excuse all the horrific killings committed or commanded by your god - your excuse is that those killings were justified. And in regarding them as justified, you are making a moral judgement.

It's not over yet, we will see.

No, we won't.

Good thing that's not the case. Because "X" is still the standard. "X" is what everyone who has not accepted Christ will be held to account for, therefore "X"/The Standard has not changed.

If the prior standard does not apply to those who've accepted Christ, then the standard has changed. No amount of dancing around it would change that fact.

So do you now see a need to seperate the mordern defination of 'good and morality' from that of God's?

Then maybe we should just agree to disagree.

Not an option.

No. We are judged in the after life, to decern whether or not we have shown ourself to truly want to spend eternity with God or to be eternally seperated from Him. In this seperation we are free from him or His rules.

If separation from him and his rules is contingent upon judgement according to those rules, then we are not free from them and those rules are being forced upon us.

Are you still apart of the culture? are you still connected to the 'grid?' do you still benfit from soceity and the results of the actions taken in the middle east? If yes to any of these questions, then the observation can be made that you do not seem too overly convicted to your 'political views' when they go against your 'morality.' Your just a objector in name only. As such my points still stand.

I've already taken this point down. What do you hope to accomplish by simply restating a defeated argument?

From your perspective you can say they have been misidentified or misrepersented. In 1920' and 30' germany they had no way to to identify this misrepersentation, because of the book burnings there was no point of reference therefore for them the 'facts' changed.

again because hitler thought and taught as you do "That facts do not change" all he need do was remove what he indentified as propaganda, and supplied 'facts' to the german people and they held them as absolutes. North Korean leadership has also done this for 3 generations to great benfit in keeping the kim's in power.

This way of thinking is dangerous because it does not lend itself to truth, there are no real absolutes. and without them a people are doomed to go where ever the 'facts' (and those who control the facts) lead them.

Facts don't depend on perspective - mine or yours. The the 1920's Germany could not identify the misrepresentation does not mean the facts were not misrepresented. That they did not have any point of reference before does not mean facts changed - just their knowledge of those facts.

That Hitler pushed propaganda as facts did not magically make his statements factual. No more than Kim's propaganda being factual.

That something is presented and accepted as fact does not make it one and any change in the presentation or acceptance does not constitute a change in facts.

I did not say it was factual, but that it was upheld as fact, and taught as fact. Then that fact changed when more information was made avaiable.

Repeat after me - "Something being upheld as a fact or taught as a fact does not automatically become a fact". Keep repeating until it sinks in.

This is what the Nazi's and North korea has done. They equate ALL fact as truth as you have, then elimate all information except the facts they provide leaving a fact based public to only one possiable conclusion..,.

All facts are true by definition. What the Nazis and North Korea have done is misrepresent and lie about facts. That those lies are accepted as facs does not make them factual.

Now how do you differ in your worship of 'facts?'

The difference is I don't worship facts.

If your ablity to worship 'fact' as truth was somehow limited, how would you possiably know if the fact you had were indeed factual? How are you any different than a person living in nazi germany or N/korea, if everything you are is based on 'facts' that can change based on knoweledge that may or may not be avaiable?

Given that I don't worship facts, this argument doesn't apply.

The problem with fact worship is the lie needed to hold it all together. The lie is that 'facts' are indeed Absolute truth. (or they are treated as such.) When in truth the changing nature of fact disqualifies it as absolute truth. Because absolute truth does not change, while facts do.

You've got your epistemology ass-backwards.

Neither truth nor facts are regarded as absolutes in any sense. Facts are the state of reality - they change with reality (but not by propaganda, as you've been wrongly claiming).

without absolutes, your 'truth'/facts becomes a controled variable. This variable then because a matter of will to the people or to men like the Kims or even to a hitler. (The content/results may vary, but the method of control remains the same.) however if there are any absolutes to compare to (like say God's truth) then soceity has the chance of refinding center again.

False dichotomy. That the truth/facts are not absolutes does not makes them controllable variables. Which is why your whole argument falls flat on its face.

[MindForgedManacle]

Wow, this thread is still alive? O_o I forgot about it after Drich stopped responding to me. The strain of responding to Gen seems to be taking a toll on you Drich; your arguments are, if anything, even worse and contradicting things you earlier said.

[I am God]

I've also been a Christian 2/3's of my life and have spent the last 6 to 8 years studying the bible and answering questions 4 to 8 hours just about everyday, and I still haven't accumulated a 'wealth of knoweledge' yet.. Maybe that is why I am still in the faith and you are not. Because at no point have I ever believed that I have it all figured out..

Keep studying and maybe you'll get there. I spent about 15 years and some at the university level studying the bible. I've studied the original Hebrew and Greek. I know the book's origins, I know where these myths came from and I know the history of how they were generated. You cannot just study the bible and then think you understand it. You have to understand the history of the cultures that surrounded it and how it came to exist. You have to understand the cultures that pre-date it and how they effected it's creation. It's a much bigger puzzle than just the book.

I have A/S/Ked every question I had, and got an answer. These answers made me re-examine my understanding of God and religion, and I had to change what i initially thought about God and religion, After i did there was nothing i could ask that God did not provide an answer for. So i sought your questions to A/S/K. To date there hasn't been a biblically based question i haven't been able to get an answer to. now that does not mean you all like my answers or except them, but nothing has gone unanswered as of yet.

Without using the BS response of "Mysterious Ways" or "Bigger plan that we don't always understand." What answer did you get for why God allows children to suffer and die when he himself has the power to help them? Take a look at this picture of this vulture waiting for his meal to stop moving so he may feast... where is your God at in this picture...

There are factual biblically based conditions on Christianity therefore no true scotsman does not apply.

LOL.. please share them with me. This should be funny.

Probably not. You had sincerity and support from people with the same feelings.

As i just said.

The Proof God offers has nothing to do with your peers or parents. If your total experience hinges on what your peers and family said/did then you never A/S/K as outlined in luke 11. Therefore you never 'had it.'

I see... I guess I'm not a True Scotsman after all huh? Such a pitiful response. I had hoped for more.

Because you did do what God asked of you and found nothing?
I'm sure for you this all somehow makes sense. I do not share your belief.

Don't be childish. I have no belief. If you question the bible, God, and Christianity and judaism completely... you will find the lack of substance in them. But you do have to disconnect your fear of Hell, fear of death, and fear of losing your security blanket first. Otherwise you will always revert back to Faith by Fear. You won't see it as that... you'll claim it brings you peace, and you feel the warmth and love of Christ enveloping you. What you feel is the false sense of security your delusion lends you. And that's ok... you can have that if you want it. Just don't get any of it on the rest of us... and stay out of our way as we progress the species. Mankind doesn't need and in fact is better off without such nonsensical garbage.

Your right as a form of morality God's righteousness is not applicable to mordern values, which is why i have made an attempt to seperate the two.

But you can't. They flow from the same source... Man.

Because the modern understanding is based on works/deeds. and what God has established is not.

Depends on if you worship Paul or James. " For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also"

You've seem to miss the point. Hulk and thor was use to establish a context, you speaking to content of hulk and thor.

I have no idea what you're saying here.

Actually it doesn't. Man's morlity as I have said 6 dozen times already is based on works deeds and God's is not. There are two completely different ways of determining value here, you keep trying to combine them into one.

Because they come from the same source... Man. Man creates God and sets him on the unreachable pedestal. And he is perfectly righteous and his ways are not our ways blah blah blah. But then we watch God... and the instructions he gives man. And he doesn't act in any way that we'd consider moral. And so an excuse must be made for that. Who are we to judge God? His ways are not our ways. Go back to Job... he allowed the man to be tortured... he showed such cruel indifference to Job. And the second Job dare question him... his response is basically... "I'm God, I made the earth and heavens... how dare your question me." So this is the central hub of God's righteousness... cause God says so and he's God. And the simple believer has to just accept that he's superior and so it must be right. But it's the key that he's fiction. Because even though he's supposed to be morally perfect and righteous... his actions are very human and flawed.

again God does not look at works to judge good or bad
Man does.

Depends on if you worship Paul or James I guess. And spare me the Spiritual Currency argument. It's apologetic nonsense.

If God is a creation of man then why did we give God a value system that is completely forgein to us? You still don't seem to get it even given your mastery of the bible.

That's what makes him God. Why does superman fly, have unlimited strength, and can shoot laser beams from his eyes? That's what makes him a super man. Your God couldn't be the majestic character he is if he was just like us. He has to be all powerful, all knowing, and perfectly righteous. Otherwise he wouldn't be God. It's circular reasoning. Why is this invented perfect being so perfect? Cause he's a a perfect being and that's how he rolls. Why would anyone NOT fancy their invented God perfectly and so inhumanly righteous? Yet when you look at the laws he inspired or even dictated straight to man... He's far from anything approaching what we'd call moral. Yet he must remain perfectly righteous because he's God and he can do that. The mental gymnastics you guys jump through to stay in your delusion are impressive. But I understand it comes from a place of accepting without reason or question.

Show me a culture that shows an indifference to murder (not killing but murder.)

That's the key isn't it? What you define as murder. What about abortion? If you deem that murder then OUR culture is indifferent to murder. What about soldiers? Is the killing they do murder? I mean are we fighting an invading force in the middle east or just killing people we've labeled as bad guys and therefore they must die? Everyone has an opinion. And different people will justify it in different ways. I've heard stories of soldiers killing non-combatants just because they were "Bad" people. My best bro is a Sgt in the Army. Did two go arounds in Iraq. He saw an Iraqi man executed by joes because he burned his wife to death in the street. He apparently beat her up, covered her in gas, and lit her on fire and they showed up just as she was dying. He wasn't a terrorist, he didn't have a gun... but they killed him anyway. Was that murder? Was it Justice? Are we indifferent to it because he himself was a murderer? WAS he a murderer if his magic book gave him the right by his God to do that to his wife? A book that more than likely says she's property to be disposed of.

Then you mean to say that everytime a killer is identified as a murderer then He is always deemed morally wrong and owes a debt to soceity?

I would say that if a society and their agreed upon laws deem someone a murdered then that individual will pay whatever debt that society demands. Often times you'll find the family of the accused and the family of the dead on different sides of that table. One feeling justice must be served and the other feeling it already has. People have a tendency to be the hero in their own story.

Unless you are to be judged by Him, on the bases of His standard.

And I won't be. I am judged by my cultures agreed upon view of morality. And even then, so long as I don't break any laws and do no harm to others... what's it matter? You're sorta leaning into the same old lame ass Christian nonsense of submit or burn. That's a pretty weak stance to fall back on.

But let's look at that. If I take a 13 year old girl, murder her mother and father, shave her head and give her a month to grieve... then by your bible's standards (That God either inspired or commanded himself)... I can then take her as my wife and rape her. Or if I just happen upon a 13 year old girl in town and decide to rape her... all I have to do is give her dad 30 pieces of silver and marry her and all is well. But you see in our culture those are crimes. And rightfully so... so it would appear our morality is superior. Because nowhere in that given exchange are the girl's rights even considered at all. You cannot point to a text that treats women and minorities like cattle and claim it has anything to do with righteousness or morality. You've lost before you've even begun.

Can you support your claim?

To what end? My evidence for the lack of a Santa Claus is the complete and total lack of proof that he is real. There are stories, songs, paintings, and propaganda... and yet no Santa. You know it... and I know it. Same is true for God. There are stories, songs, paintings, and propaganda... but when you get right down to it... NOTHING of the divine has EVER been substantiated. He's every bit as a real as Santa, The Easter Bunny, Talking Dragons, Flying Unicorns, Magical Elves, and Fairy Princesses. All things dreamt up by man's imagination. The very lack of evidence is the only evidence in something's non-existence.

[Drich]

Thank you for laying out the detailed, step-by-step generation of your particular brand of No True Scotsman fallacy.

First of all, there is no reason to assume that whatever crap is written in your Bible can be validly considered as a criteria for a "True Christian" - much less what is written in Mat 7.
Second of all, in the absence of the words "here are the terms and conditions for being a True Christian", there is no indication that the verses you quoted are meant to draw the line between True and False Christians - that is your subjective interpretation. The only thing a literal interpretation tells here is who can't enter Heaven - and even that is not made very clear.

If you can't admit to what is clearly on page then there is no reason to read anything else you have written.

Third of all, and quite interestingly, I might add, literal interpretation of this verse undercuts the point you've been making all along - that your god's morality is not based on works. Here, your Christ asks people to do god's will and speaks against those who practice lawlessness - clearly, he regards your works as the criteria for entering heaven. Its just that those works don't happen to include prophesying in his name or casting out demons or doing wonders.

How did you make the jump between 'God's morality is based on works' and what Christ said in Mat 7?

How is a call to following the law mean one's righteousness/morality is bound to it?

Then why isn't the majorty of christianity practiced this way? look at catholicism, it is works based. It claims to be the orginal version of Christianity. If it is as you say, and christianity was based in a 'works free enviorment' to attract members then why was their a focous on works for 2/3's of the church's history?

You miss the point - the whole works-free propaganda is only to attract followers. Once you become a follower, the religion has to milk you for all you are worth, which means, shifting the focus back on works. This is just one of the many fundamental contradictions within Christianity.

I missed the point?

If 2/3's of the Chruch History (1500+ years before the reformation) is/was based on Works then how was it to attract members based on works free living?

Actually, that wasn't my assertion.

If you think you can identify an act of murder without a moral judgement then go ahead and try.

I don't have to. Merrium webster has done this for you.
: the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought

To unlawfully kill another person. There is no moral judgement in the determination if someone breaks a law or not. Now i will admit that there is an element of moral judgement in the creation of said law, but the simple fact of identifying murder is not a matter of morality. It is seeing if the death of person A by person B meets the law requirements of killing another person.

The reason you can't is because the definition of murder that you appeal to is "unjustified killing". The reason you appeal to this definition is because that is the only way you can excuse all the horrific killings committed or commanded by your god - your excuse is that those killings were justified. And in regarding them as justified, you are making a moral judgement.

If you will note in the defination above I still 'appeal to the unsanctioned killing of a person or people.

Facts don't depend on perspective - mine or yours. The the 1920's Germany could not identify the misrepresentation does not mean the facts were not misrepresented. That they did not have any point of reference before does not mean facts changed - just their knowledge of those facts.

That Hitler pushed propaganda as facts did not magically make his statements factual. No more than Kim's propaganda being factual.

That something is presented and accepted as fact does not make it one and any change in the presentation or acceptance does not constitute a change in facts.

Ah, i see the problem! You don't have a full understanding of the word 'facts.'

As i said Facts can mean truth but the word is not limited to truth. Merrium-webster also defines a fact as: 5: a piece of information presented as having objective reality

I am going to assume you have an idea of what objective reality is, but just incase you don't:
http://www.trinity.edu/cbrown/modern/des...ality.html

Simply put in the way I am using this word to describe Hitler's 'facts' in the propaganda he issued. a 'fact' is a statement that can be proved or disproved, as per the loose understanding of objective reality.

I did not say it was factual, but that it was upheld as fact, and taught as fact. Then that fact changed when more information was made avaiable.

Repeat after me - "Something being upheld as a fact or taught as a fact does not automatically become a fact". Keep repeating until it sinks in.

Repeat after me - "I will look words up before i try and teach others their meaning." Keep repeating until it sinks in.

All facts are true by definition. What the Nazis and North Korea have done is misrepresent and lie about facts. That those lies are accepted as facs does not make them factual.

What you said is a fact, just not a true one. The merrium webster defination proves it wrong, although it still is a fact.

[Silver]

Am I reading it properly? Is Drippy defending Hitler?

And your skewed definition of fact would only be correct if it stated subjective reality. Clearly, you are the one who needs to understand how words work and stop using semantics to hide your ignorance.

[Drich]

Keep studying and maybe you'll get there. I spent about 15 years and some at the university level studying the bible.

Where? what was your objective? what would take 15 years to learn? did you accomplish your goal? What happened?

I've studied the original Hebrew and Greek. I know the book's origins, I know where these myths came from and I know the history of how they were generated. You cannot just study the bible and then think you understand it. You have to understand the history of the cultures that surrounded it and how it came to exist. You have to understand the cultures that pre-date it and how they effected it's creation. It's a much bigger puzzle than just the book.

Really?!?!? That's good to know.

Without using the BS response of "Mysterious Ways" or "Bigger plan that we don't always understand." What answer did you get for why God allows children to suffer and die when he himself has the power to help them? Take a look at this picture of this vulture waiting for his meal to stop moving so he may feast... where is your God at in this picture...

God doesn't allow Children to suffer. God empowered whole nations with an excess of wealth, with the money, resources, logisitcal ablity to solve all the world's hunger problems, but rather than help, and come off some of the nation's excess, The world's d-bags curse God for not giving everyone the excess they have come a custom to.
All the while He has made it possiable to care for these people If we would only share what we have.

Because Greed has so filled the Hearts of people like you (who would post a picture like this and question God all the while has a month's worth of food in their house) You see you excess as an entitlement, rather than a call to share. To the point where you demand God give everyone the same excess you enjoy. All the while if you and everyone like you were to simply take less and give more, Pictures like this would not exist.

How do I know you not a person who "takes less and gives more?" Because you asked the question why does God let babies like this starve. If you spent any time working in situations like this you would have your answer and not need to ask God or me. Even people who work secular benevolence programs knows the answer to this problem.

LOL.. please share them with me. This should be funny.

Already gone over them with genkaus.

I see... I guess I'm not a True Scotsman after all huh? Such a pitiful response. I had hoped for more.

Define the 'No true scotsman fallacy'

Don't be childish. I have no belief. If you question the bible, God, and Christianity and judaism completely...

What makes you think I haven't? Because I did not come to your conclusions?

you will find the lack of substance in them.

I saw the 'lack of substance' others were trying to make a case for, and I pressed on till i found God. I did not look at the bible as proof of the treasure it talks about I look to follow the directions it provided and found what it promised. A map is not 'proof' of treasure. It is the treasure that prooves a map's legitmacy.
The "substance" arguements always focous on the idea that it is possiable to determine whether or not the map will lead to treasure by exaimining the map itself and how/when it was made. This would be a legitmate way to discern a map's viablity if ALL the Variables were known. In short after 2000+ years the variables can never be known, so the only viable way to comfirm the legitmacy of the map is to follow it, not to discuss in a committy whether or not there is enough evidence to support the claim of the viablity concerning the proablity of.. whatever.

Just follow the directions exactly and if you find what you have been promised then the map is good.

But you do have to disconnect your fear of Hell, fear of death, and fear of losing your security blanket first.

I do not fear death or hell. I have found quite the oppsite is true. It is the Atheist who fears accountiablity, and subsequently Hell. That is why he works so hard to try and 'kill God' with his logic and reason. It's a judgement day defense strageity. a plan 'b' if you will. So you can goto God and claim there was not enough 'proof' therfore you could not be held accountable to your deeds. The Atheist Needs oblivion to avoid Hell.

If there is no Heaven and no Hell then where is the need for fear?

Otherwise you will always revert back to Faith by Fear.

My faith is based in love, I have seen the gates of Hell and do not fear them more than I long to be welcomed into the Love God offers us.

But you can't. They flow from the same source... Man.

Then why does one contradict the other?

Depends on if you worship Paul or James. " For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also"

So this is your Collage level stuff huh? You do know Paul and James are talking about two different types of death correct? If so then what does the worship of Paul over James have to do with the context of these two seperate passages?

Actually it doesn't. Man's morlity as I have said 6 dozen times already is based on works deeds and God's is not. There are two completely different ways of determining value here, you keep trying to combine them into one.

Because they come from the same source... Man. Man creates God and sets him on the unreachable pedestal. And he is perfectly righteous and his ways are not our ways blah blah blah. But then we watch God... and the instructions he gives man. And he doesn't act in any way that we'd consider moral.

But, if our defination of 'moral is always changing, and God does not change then how can He possiably be 'moral'? Are you so blind to see that you are describing the Ultimate example of shift the goal posts?
Even by the standards of man's own logic you line of thought is falicious.

And so an excuse must be made for that. Who are we to judge God? His ways are not our ways. Go back to Job... he allowed the man to be tortured...

But, He didn't He protected Job (per the 'hedge' satan described that God put around his whole life.) All except the time satan was allowed to challenge job's faith. And, even then there were limits God placed on Satan. When the challenge was over and Job proved Himself faithful He was given 10x's what he lost.

he showed such cruel indifference to Job.

In all of your collegic level of study have you even read the book of Job? If you had you know the 'indifference Came from satan and not God. God parshially 'lowered the shield' around Job and satan attacked to the limits of what he was allowed. If God was indifferent then why was their a 'shield' before durning and after the trial of job?

And the second Job dare question him... his response is basically... "I'm God, I made the earth and heavens... how dare your question me."

In-fracking-deed.

So this is the central hub of God's righteousness... cause God says so and he's God.

Yes, Might makes right.

And the simple believer has to just accept that he's superior and so it must be right.

Amen. preach it!

But it's the key that he's fiction. Because even though he's supposed to be morally perfect and righteous... his actions are very human and flawed.

If this were true then why doesn't God's 'morality' match or even exceed our own? Why is it shown to be completely different than anything man has ever known? Why was it written this way if it is contary to what we understand?

That's what makes him God. Why does superman fly, have unlimited strength, and can shoot laser beams from his eyes? That's what makes him a super man. Your God couldn't be the majestic character he is if he was just like us. He has to be all powerful, all knowing, and perfectly righteous. Otherwise he wouldn't be God.

But again God would not be God if He is somehow thought to be 'less' than us. Doesn't the 'morality' of God make Him less than us? if so how can He still be God, if we are just making stuff up? It would seem to me that atheist believe the God is supposted repersent their morality times 10. This was what was taught in the darkages church for quite sometime (1500+ years). So again my question is if this is what we think God is supposed to be, then why is it the oppsite (in most cases) of what the bible teaches?

If it is as you say and we have created God to reflect the best of the best of man.. To be a 'super-man.' Then why does He fall short when we compare Him to our goal post of morality?

It's circular reasoning. Why is this invented perfect being so perfect? Cause he's a a perfect being and that's how he rolls.

But that's just it sport, all the stuff you brought up in Job proves He is not your understanding of perfect. (even if you got it all wrong.)

Why would anyone NOT fancy their invented God perfectly and so inhumanly righteous?

EXACTLY!!!, So why is the God of the bible 'flawed' by your understanding of morality if He were indeed created by man?

Yet when you look at the laws he inspired or even dictated straight to man... He's far from anything approaching what we'd call moral. Yet he must remain perfectly righteous because he's God and he can do that. The mental gymnastics you guys jump through to stay in your delusion are impressive. But I understand it comes from a place of accepting without reason or question.

You are missing a HUGE piece of the puzzle. (which means your 15 years of bible study was probably a waist of time)

Again, I point back to the church of the dark ages. They are the ones who set into motion the idea of maintaining a set 'moral standard.' (the same basic principle we live by today) Not content but a works based form of righteousness. These guys had complete control of the bible. They even translated it into a dead language so as to keep it out of the hands of the common man. this allowed them to make all sorts of changes and completely control all aspects of this religion without anyone having the ablity to question their authority.

My question to you is, why wasn't the bible changed then to reflect this works based morality they pushed hard for 1500 years? Why wasn't the picture of God changed to reflect the image of man/super-man/god thing you described?

They had complete control over all the manuscripts of the bible, and over all the traditions of the church in that time. So Why didn't the written word in 1500 years make the changes the church at that time did?

what perserved the bible as it was written?

Again if things happen like you said, all anyone need do was lose an orginal book and replace it with one that made the changes needed to support their church doctrine. In that time they had no problems comming up with stuff like that. Pieces of the orginal cross, the shroud Christ was buried in, the spear He was periced with, the nails they used. All the church need do is have the pope bless this new thing and it was law.
So why wasn't God changed if God was man made then? Why did God stand in stark contrast to the doings of the church in that period?

[Drich]

Am I reading it properly? Is Drippy defending Hitler?

And your skewed definition of fact would only be correct if it stated subjective reality. Clearly, you are the one who needs to understand how words work and stop using semantics to hide your ignorance.

when?

[Whateverist]

It has been a long time since I was on this thread. Pretty obvious why. Walls of words but nothing I get stomach.

[I am God]

Where? what was your objective? what would take 15 years to learn? did you accomplish your goal? What happened?

Piedmont College. A small but well staffed Christian College in NE Georgia. My objective was to get a B.A. in Philosophy and Religion with a heavy concentration on Judeo-Christian Religious Traditions. And no, I didn't accomplish my goals because my studies eventually ended my faith. I switched majors about 85% through my course of study. Didn't want to pay another $10K towards something that had already taken enough from me. I later went on to get a Masters in another field. I am currently considering getting my PhD in Psychology. I didn't say I spent 15 years in college, sorry if I gave that impression. I spent 15 years studying the bible. For the first portion of my studies I was in love with Christ. I wanted to know everything about him. I wanted to learn all I could learn about my God. I saw so many people claiming to be followers of Christ yet all they could do was repeat a few lines of scripture. And many had terrible misconceptions that they had heard from somewhere but never bothered to verify. They only read the bible in church. And they certainly didn't seem to practice what they preached. That wasn't going to be good enough for me. I wanted to know everything I could find about my God. I was raised in a Christian home. I was one of those kids that went to vacation bible school, summer church camp, young christian clubs, all that good stuff. It was more serious to me than school, or play, or anything else. Everything else came second. Unfortunately for that young man who was so happy in his delusion... his hunger for knowledge is what eventually pulled him out and woke him up to reality. And I think you'll find that's the key to destroying faith... knowledge. I mean that's what God was trying to deny us from the beginning wasn't it? He offered us blissful ignorance if we only avoid knowledge. Seems there is a poetic truth in that archaic story. But not the one the church would have everyone believe.

God doesn't allow Children to suffer.

Of course he does. Walk into any cancer ward at a children's hospital. Your god could take away their sickness with a snap of his fingers. He has the power... yet he does nothing. That isn't simply a different kind of moral... that's just evil. Did god not provide food for the multitudes? Did Jesus not wield the power of his father to raise Lazarus? The bible seems to paint a picture of a god that can and in fact does step in to aid those who suffer. How many of those sick and dying children in those cancer beds you think are praying to your God? How many of them you think he's gonna let wither and die in terrible pain and suffering? Seems your God deserves a mill stone slung around his neck and to be cast into the sea.

God empowered whole nations with an excess of wealth, with the money, resources, logisitcal ablity to solve all the world's hunger problems, but rather than help, and come off some of the nation's excess, The world's d-bags curse God for not giving everyone the excess they have come a custom to.
All the while He has made it possiable to care for these people If we would only share what we have.

LOL, so man get's the blame for the inequities of God. Such a simple minded reply. Why is it that we seem to keep messing up this perfect being's plans. Seems he's a terrible planner. He's had to reboot his plan for us here THREE times! The Garden didn't work out like he planned. The Garden aftermath didn't work out like he wanted so he brings the flood. And then we still couldn't get our act together so he had to impregnate a child with his son who is himself so that he could allow himself to die as payment for the sin of man. God sounds like a kid trying to build his own tree house. All the while the beings he claims to love so much suffer needlessly (in the face of infinite power and wisdom).

Because Greed has so filled the Hearts of people like you (who would post a picture like this and question God all the while has a month's worth of food in their house) You see you excess as an entitlement, rather than a call to share. To the point where you demand God give everyone the same excess you enjoy. All the while if you and everyone like you were to simply take less and give more, Pictures like this would not exist.

Oooo such venom spewing from you. I must have stepped on a nerve. I'm just going to ignore this post. You know nothing about me that I haven't told you. It's obvious you're simply coming unglued and spraying that good old hatred I've come to expect from followers of Christ when you tug at their security blanket. He'd be ashamed of your example.

How do I know you not a person who "takes less and gives more?" Because you asked the question why does God let babies like this starve. If you spent any time working in situations like this you would have your answer and not need to ask God or me. Even people who work secular benevolence programs knows the answer to this problem.

The answer is us. We have to take care of ourselves because your God isn't doing squat. You're so blind that you blame your god's inaction... on man. Is your God so weak that we are holding him back. Unlimited cosmic power but we little ants are messing up his grand scheme? Do you not see how absurd your ideals are? Are WE the rock so big God cannot move us? By the way... this is another example of the No True Scotsman. You know I am not X because X would never do Y.

Define the 'No true scotsman fallacy'

We both know what it is. I believe it's up to you to demonstrate how it doesn't apply here.

What makes you think I haven't? Because I did not come to your conclusions?

No, because you take the absurd for granted. You defend the flaws and holes in your argument with the assumption that your myth must be held as true before moving forward. This is not the progression of a line of questioning but a clumsy attempt at justifying the ridiculous.

I saw the 'lack of substance' others were trying to make a case for, and I pressed on till i found God.

How tall is he? What's he smell like? What color are his eyes? You claim to have found him... please... tell us what he's like.

I did not look at the bible as proof of the treasure it talks about I look to follow the directions it provided and found what it promised. A map is not 'proof' of treasure. It is the treasure that prooves a map's legitmacy.
The "substance" arguements always focous on the idea that it is possiable to determine whether or not the map will lead to treasure by exaimining the map itself and how/when it was made. This would be a legitmate way to discern a map's viablity if ALL the Variables were known. In short after 2000+ years the variables can never be known, so the only viable way to comfirm the legitmacy of the map is to follow it, not to discuss in a committy whether or not there is enough evidence to support the claim of the viablity concerning the proablity of.. whatever.

I see, so we are fools for expecting the inerrant word of God to be... inerrant? Is this a map made by makeshift topographers or the living breathing word of our creator? You seem to be holding the bible to sort of a simplistic standard. Would God allow his word to return unto him void? This is his message to us... not a grocery list.

Just follow the directions exactly and if you find what you have been promised then the map is good.

I followed the map and found lies, myths, and legends.

I do not fear death or hell.

I'm sure... your delusion promises that you're protected from them. That's its hold on you. It controls you by fear. It's a security blanket for adults.

It is the Atheist who fears accountiablity, and subsequently Hell.

Once again, only in your delusion. There is no such place and accountability to who? Your invented titan? Surely not.

That is why he works so hard to try and 'kill God' with his logic and reason.

Do you not see the irony in this statement? You're basically agreeing that Logic and Reason are forces that work against God. There may be hope for you coming out of your delusion yet.

It's a judgement day defense strageity. a plan 'b' if you will. So you can goto God and claim there was not enough 'proof' therfore you could not be held accountable to your deeds. The Atheist Needs oblivion to avoid Hell.

Now which is it that you believe in? Hell... or the second death. You can't believe in both.

If there is no Heaven and no Hell then where is the need for fear?

Again you're kind of pissing in your own yard with this logic. You're admitting that religion controls you by fear here. Submit or burn. And death is a very natural fear in all living things. Even a bacteria will attempt to avoid death. No longer existing is a bad thing. This is why man invented Gods that would scoop them up into an eternal life and punish those that didn't believe, or sing the right songs, or do the right dances. It's man's ego combined with his fear of death that creates a mythology where he must continue on after this life. And since we know our bodies most certainly die and rot... it must be our magical soul that goes on. It's a fear as old as man himself. Before man invented your God... there were others.

My faith is based in love

No it isn't. You cannot separate Jesus from the tyrant Yahweh. They are one in the same. And Yahweh condones slavery, murder, rape, what we would consider pedophilia, and kidnapping. Just because he showed up in the flesh and was all lovey dovey doesn't excuse his rampage the 1,300 or so years prior.

I have seen the gates of Hell and do not fear them more than I long to be welcomed into the Love God offers us.

Really? Where are they? What did they look like? Can you show them to me? Are you claiming to have had visions? Do we need to call a mental health professional?

Then why does one contradict the other?

Because they creators see man as sick and twisted. God must be above that. He must be more pure and good than we are. And even our best moral ideals must pale in comparison to his.

So this is your Collage level stuff huh? You do know Paul and James are talking about two different types of death correct? If so then what does the worship of Paul over James have to do with the context of these two seperate passages?

We aren't talking about which type of death. We are talking about whether man wins God acknowledges works or just faith.

"But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only."

Actually it doesn't. Man's morlity as I have said 6 dozen times already is based on works deeds and God's is not. There are two completely different ways of determining value here, you keep trying to combine them into one.

Because they are. You're just cherry picking your beliefs.

But, if our defination of 'moral is always changing, and God does not change then how can He possiably be 'moral'? Are you so blind to see that you are describing the Ultimate example of shift the goal posts?
Even by the standards of man's own logic you line of thought is falicious.

God's standard doesn't change because the bible is not open to edit. It's the bible's greatest weakness. It remains stagnant and therefore archaic. As man evolves and moves past our savage past (slowly but surely) we begin to see the Yahweh character for the joke he is. But look closely when the bible WAS open to edit. We move from a blood thirsty fire and brimstone titan like Yahweh to a peace loving hippy like Yeshua. And yet the Christian sees no disparity. It's one of the greatest hypocrisies of all time. Understand that your bible was (New Testament) was selected for you by the very people that nailed Yeshua to the cross. There were dozens if not hundreds of Gospels written about Jesus... and the Romans selected the four you call the foundation of your faith for you. Think about that for a second. Think of all the writings that you'll never know about that were burned or smashed. And the story you accept as god's word was picked for you by the Romans. And you claim it contains truth? Please...

But, He didn't He protected Job (per the 'hedge' satan described that God put around his whole life.) All except the time satan was allowed to challenge job's faith.

LMAO... I see, so God was still lookin after Job... even though he turned the most power being outside of the trinity loose on him. And all to settle a wager. Do you not see how flawed God is in the passage. Satan punked God in Job. He goaded him and God went for it. And in the end... Satan was right. Job turned on God to the point that he had to come down and bully Job back into fearing him. Satan made a fool of God in Job.

BTW... did you know that Satan means "Truth" in Sanskrit? A language that predates the Hebrew culture.

And, even then there were limits God placed on Satan. When the challenge was over and Job proved Himself faithful He was given 10x's what he lost.

First Job only submitted when God shook his fist at him... not because of how wonderful and good he was. It's not faith... it's the ant submitting to the kid with the magnifying glass.

Second... I'm sure the restoration meant a great deal to the loved ones God allowed to be murdered just to prove Satan was right.

Third, if you admit that God can protect people... what about the child in the picture? Why does God ignore him?

In all of your collegic level of study have you even read the book of Job? If you had you know the 'indifference Came from satan and not God. God parshially 'lowered the shield' around Job and satan attacked to the limits of what he was allowed. If God was indifferent then why was their a 'shield' before durning and after the trial of job?

If he wasn't indifferent... why'd he let it down knowing the horrors Satan was going to deliver upon him? Let's break this down to our level. I have a puppy that I love and care for. The puppy loves me. You say... "That puppy wouldn't love you anymore if you bring him outside and let me kick him in the head a few times." And then to see if you're right... I let my beloved little puppy outside to be submitted to your ruthlessness. What kind of master am I? Pretty bad one. Sure... it's my puppy and I can do what I like with it. But that still makes me an inhuman piece of shit doesn't it? That's what God show's himself to be in Job. He is the one that allows the brutalization of Job and the murder of his family.

In-fracking-deed.

So God is no better than a 12 year old bully?

Yes, Might makes right.

Really? So if a man comes in your home and kills you and rapes your wife and kills your kids... He's right? Just simply because he's stronger? Interesting if not misguided view of what is right.

If this were true then why doesn't God's 'morality' match or even exceed our own? Why is it shown to be completely different than anything man has ever known? Why was it written this way if it is contary to what we understand?

I explained this earlier.

But again God would not be God if He is somehow thought to be 'less' than us. Doesn't the 'morality' of God make Him less than us? if so how can He still be God

Simple... he isn't. He's just a character created by bronze age savages.

It would seem to me that atheist believe the God is supposted repersent their morality times 10. This was what was taught in the darkages church for quite sometime (1500+ years). So again my question is if this is what we think God is supposed to be, then why is it the oppsite (in most cases) of what the bible teaches?

Already explained.

If it is as you say and we have created God to reflect the best of the best of man.. To be a 'super-man.' Then why does He fall short when we compare Him to our goal post of morality?

I didn't say that he's supposed to be the best of man. He is supposed to be morally perfect and righteous. But his actions show him not to be. What would you say of a being that allowed a monster to murder someone's family? What would your view of that act be given that you have a Christian ethic. What if I had a killer on a leash and he dared me to let him have his way with your family and I let him. What kind of being would that make me by your Christian ethic?

But that's just it sport, all the stuff you brought up in Job proves He is not your understanding of perfect. (even if you got it all wrong.)

LMAO... c'mon now... don't start down that ridiculous "His ways aren't our ways" intellectually dishonest christian cop out nonsense. God does evil things and you guys say "You just don't understand his plan" or "Mysterious ways" or some other ethereal unseen level nonsense. Don't be childish. There's a reason no one can find Santa at the north pole. And it isn't because he has some kind of magic invisible palace that we somehow don't understand.

EXACTLY!!!, So why is the God of the bible 'flawed' by your understanding of morality if He were indeed created by man?

Because he was invented by savages who's value system is archaic... what about this aren't you getting? Yahweh was perfect for the Israelites of 500 BCE. He crushed their enemies, gave them the right to rape and pillage whoever they wanted, and justified their wants and desires so long as they made a burnt offering to him. He was a Barbarian Tribe War God and was perfect in every way FOR THEM. He seems odd and mysterious to us because we don't share their values. But it's just because he's outdated. Their view of God began to change as well after the Babylonians kicked the shit out of them and destroyed their temple.

You are missing a HUGE piece of the puzzle. (which means your 15 years of bible study was probably a waist of time)

Says who? You? I don't take that real seriously.

Again, I point back to the church of the dark ages. They are the ones who set into motion the idea of maintaining a set 'moral standard.' (the same basic principle we live by today) Not content but a works based form of righteousness. These guys had complete control of the bible. They even translated it into a dead language so as to keep it out of the hands of the common man. this allowed them to make all sorts of changes and completely control all aspects of this religion without anyone having the ablity to question their authority.

What does this have to do with the price of tea in China?

My question to you is, why wasn't the bible changed then to reflect this works based morality they pushed hard for 1500 years? Why wasn't the picture of God changed to reflect the image of man/super-man/god thing you described?

The bible isn't open to edit. Sure there are off shoots and other religions. The mormons believe Joseph Smith was inspired to write his nonsense. But the original Greek and Hebrew texts are what I'm talking about.

They had complete control over all the manuscripts of the bible, and over all the traditions of the church in that time. So Why didn't the written word in 1500 years make the changes the church at that time did?

what perserved the bible as it was written?

I'm not sure I understand your question. We have ancient texts that have survived that show us much of what is contained in the bible. And some of it has been lost. Some of it is guess work. And a good deal of it has been mistranslated. But it's core isn't open to edit. To do so would be heresy. Something that could get you killed up until a few hundred years ago.

Again if things happen like you said, all anyone need do was lose an orginal book and replace it with one that made the changes needed to support their church doctrine. In that time they had no problems comming up with stuff like that. Pieces of the orginal cross, the shroud Christ was buried in, the spear He was periced with, the nails they used. All the church need do is have the pope bless this new thing and it was law.
So why wasn't God changed if God was man made then? Why did God stand in stark contrast to the doings of the church in that period?

Much of those things probably were manufactured. As far as why no changes during the dark ages... there was no need... the church had ultimate power... why mess up a good thing? Plus the people truly believed it. It wasn't like the knew it a was BS and so were just using it as a gimmick. Like you... the truly believed it and felt they were serving God.

[Drich]

I spent 15 years studying the bible. For the first portion of my studies I was in love with Christ. I wanted to know everything about him. I wanted to learn all I could learn about my God. I saw so many people claiming to be followers of Christ yet all they could do was repeat a few lines of scripture. And many had terrible misconceptions that they had heard from somewhere but never bothered to verify. They only read the bible in church. And they certainly didn't seem to practice what they preached. That wasn't going to be good enough for me. I wanted to know everything I could find about my God. I was raised in a Christian home. I was one of those kids that went to vacation bible school, summer church camp, young christian clubs, all that good stuff. It was more serious to me than school, or play, or anything else. Everything else came second. Unfortunately for that young man who was so happy in his delusion...

Sounds to me as if you might have even prayed to "Truly Know God" a few times. What if your seperation from your home church/denomination was an answer to that prayer?

Do you remember the parable of the wise and foolish builders? Two men build two identical houses one on rock the other on sand the rains come the house on the sand is destroyed while the house on the rock survives.

The houses are our 'faiths'/specific religious belief in God. Our religions our ways of worship. What if your prayer asked God to take away your house built on the sand, so you had oppertunity to rebuild on the rock?

What do you think that would look like, how would God manifest this request? This website over He does this by up rooting your understanding of church and religion. So what is the difference between you and someone who rebuilds their house on the rock? I found that it is typically the 'proud heart' that says out of 30K expressions of Christianity that their particular expression of Christianity is the Only and correct one. So therefore when it is proven wrong, there can't be a God. Because they knew if there was a God He would fully back their version of Christianity... I have found This is what makes the foolish builder foolish. Not that he just built on sand but because he believes there is no place else to build a 'house.'

his hunger for knowledge is what eventually pulled him out and woke him up to reality. And I think you'll find that's the key to destroying faith... knowledge.

How can you not see what you have been describing as knoweledge is not infact knoweledge? Everything you have brough up is based on conjecture and speculation. You are using the very same methods you believe I have defaulted to in my faith.

I mean that's what God was trying to deny us from the beginning wasn't it?

Why because 'knoweledge' is one of the english words we use to describe the forbidded tree in the garden?

The word in Hebrew is דַּעַת da`ath In the context of the story it could be translated into perception of Good and Evil. Eitherway the knoweledge or perception of good and Evil was never denied otherwise the tree would not have been placed with in reach.

He offered us blissful ignorance if we only avoid knowledge. Seems there is a poetic truth in that archaic story. But not the one the church would have everyone believe.

We being finite will always be in some state of 'blissful ignorance.'

God doesn't allow Children to suffer.

Of course he does. Walk into any cancer ward at a children's hospital.

So it is your belief God gave these kids cancer? Do you have proof? or is this just what you decided to do with your 'faith' once God tore down the 'house you built on the sand.'

Your god could take away their sickness with a snap of his fingers.

He could if we lived in His kingdom, but we don't do we. If we did it would be pointless to pray "Your kingdom come Your will be done on EARTH as it is in Heaven."

This was our realm our world we are/were the masters of it. However we promptly handed it over to satan. As a result he gets to decide who gets cancer and how/if they suffer.

He has the power... yet he does nothing.

Not true He is there to receive us after this life is over if we choose to accept him.

That isn't simply a different kind of moral... that's just evil. Did god not provide food for the multitudes? Did Jesus not wield the power of his father to raise Lazarus? The bible seems to paint a picture of a god that can and in fact does step in to aid those who suffer.

Now ask yourself what was the purpose of that? It was to establish the deity of Christ. The primary reason for the miricals was not to help the person, because in the end no matter what healing they received they all still died. What Christ did was temporary inorder to establish the religion that will provide the eternal care of all who believe.

How many of those sick and dying children in those cancer beds you think are praying to your God? How many of them you think he's gonna let wither and die in terrible pain and suffering?

We all die, most in pain and in suffering. I fail to see the sin in it. The only people who see the sin are those who worship and up hold life above all else. To people like that there is no greater sin.

Seems your God deserves a mill stone slung around his neck and to be cast into the sea.

...Or what exactly? Giving us complete control over this world and all that was in it?
Or maybe when we handed it over to satan to rule on our behalf?

How is it God's responsiablity to bail us our of our own bad desisions?

LOL, so man get's the blame for the inequities of God. Such a simple minded reply.

The questions dictate the depth of the 'reply.' The answer to 1+1 will always equal 2.

Why is it that we seem to keep messing up this perfect being's plans.

Greed, Pride and a general sense of entitlement.

Seems he's a terrible planner.

The goal was not to provide for everyone. The Goal in his plan was to make it possiable for us to provide for everyone. so when D-bags point to hunger in the world and ask why, the answer they are looking for can be found in the mirror everymorning.

He's had to reboot his plan for us here THREE times! The Garden didn't work out like he planned.

What makes you think that? If God did not want us to have the ablity to choose evil He would have never planted the tree.

The Garden aftermath didn't work out like he wanted so he brings the flood.

What was the purpose of the flood? To kill of an evil this world has not seen since.

And then we still couldn't get our act together so he had to impregnate a child with his son who is himself so that he could allow himself to die as payment for the sin of man.

With this i am at a complete loss. how do you see this as a reboot? In your 15 years of study have you never run across Isaah 53? or any of the passages where Christ tell of his comming sacrifice as being apart of the plan from the beginning?

Because Greed has so filled the Hearts of people like you (who would post a picture like this and question God all the while has a month's worth of food in their house) You see you excess as an entitlement, rather than a call to share. To the point where you demand God give everyone the same excess you enjoy. All the while if you and everyone like you were to simply take less and give more, Pictures like this would not exist.

Oooo such venom spewing from you.

You have confused an observation with venom. I have work alot feeding the hungry and homless. i have worked with Christians and people outside of the church as well. there are few who have given themselves completely over to this endevor that see this problem differently. Our waisted food would feed the world

I must have stepped on a nerve. I'm just going to ignore this post.

Your response says otherwise. This is how you ignore a post you have deemed to be without merrit or meaning:

You know nothing about me that I haven't told you. It's obvious you're simply coming unglued and spraying that good old hatred I've come to expect from followers of Christ when you tug at their security blanket. He'd be ashamed of your example.

We have to take care of ourselves because your God isn't doing squat. You're so blind that you blame your god's inaction... on man. Is your God so weak that we are holding him back. Unlimited cosmic power but we little ants are messing up his grand scheme? Do you not see how absurd your ideals are? Are WE the rock so big God cannot move us? By the way... this is another example of the No True Scotsman. You know I am not X because X would never do Y.

Do you not see in this statement that you don't even understand the basics of Christianity? what this world is to us, what this world is to God? Why there is a disconnect between us and God, Or even who God is???

Yet because you are so foolish proud because you earnestly wanted to know God, you assumed your 15 years of effort has given you an accurate picture, even though when the winds and rains came what you had been building for 15 years was completely washed away, leaving you with a faith in your smarter peers (who also were so foolish as to get thier homes washed away) and what they believe about God.

I have answer your questions all of them over and over for the last 6 years. It the same questions and observations over and over and over. The only thing that changes is the avatar and screen name used.

This question:

Are WE the rock so big God cannot move us? By the way...

Or rather it in it's orginal form places you in the oldest and most sterotypical core atheism catagory. People here seldom if ever look beyong their sunday school understanding of God and the websites/friends that orginaly turn them from God.

The orginal question asks Can God make a rock so big He can not move it. This paradox has God inviolation of what has been ascribed to an Omni-max God.

Now to me the question seem foolishly simple to answer using very simply logic, and a concordance.

In order for this paradox (or any paradox like this) to work God must make an omni-max claim or God must be described as an Omni max in the bible.

In 15 years of (how did you put it?) collage level bible study did you never once observe God never makes an omni max claim, or is it ever ascribed to Him by anyone else IN The BIBLE?

This is what is known as a extra biblical doctrine. Meaning we in our arrogance and pride in one religious expression of Christianity or another have ascribed an attribute to God that God does not claim for himself in the bible. (There are many, another Good example is that we are all children of God, yet another is that we all live under God authority and protection, meaning He cares for all of His followers and lets nothing bad happen to them) Where people get this stuff? They don't read their bibles. appearently they are too busy looking verify where and when the bible was written, and by whom rather than looking at the actual content.

If they did they would see God claims to be the Alpha and Omega the beginning and end to all things. Meaning God is not bound to our understanding of what an omni max God should do. It means God is whomever and what ever He wants to be when He wants to be it without having to get permission.

That means He can create a rock so big He could not move it, or He couldn't. Eitherway an alpha and Omega has the power and authority to do so. It also Means He could create a realm and hand it completely over to humanity and allow them to do with it as they wanted, leaving us to also to contend with the complete consenquences of our actions. -Or He could interveen from time to time. again as an alpha and Omega He can do as He sees fit. Which again breaks every single Omni-max paradox ever conceived. Why? Because God can't be put in a box and be expected to behave according to our understandings or definations of What a 'God' should be.

We both know what it is. I believe it's up to you to demonstrate how it doesn't apply here.

I honestly believe we don't both understand that is why I asked you to define it.
If you do understand then I will take your defination and show you how you have miss applied it to your comments.

No, because you take the absurd for granted. You defend the flaws and holes in your argument with the assumption that your myth must be held as true before moving forward.

That's the problem with new members here. you all asume I believe in the version of God you all have found to be false. As you can see My God the God of the bible is very different that what you have been describing. Your version of God seems to be loosly based on catholism, which is steeped in religion and traditions of the church. Not the bible. Again I worship the God of the bible, not some religious manifestation loosly based on the bible.

How tall is he?

In a dream I was Judged by Christ. I'm 5'9 and initially looked down into His eyes, at the end I was down looking up.

What's he smell like?

Sunflowers.

What color are his eyes?

They were pearcing.. I want to say blue, but it was hard to see Him. Because when I looked into his eyes i saw the Love that was offered, and all that could have been in the breifest of moments, then I saw all my own sin, my own short commings and the true intentions of my heart. At that point I hit the ground and began to beg for another chance. Then the truth hit me, It would not matter how many chances I got or how long I got to prove myself I am who I was judged to be. again with all of that happening it wasn't possiable to see what was infront of me.

You claim to have found him... please... tell us what he's like.

The holy Spirit is much different. This is the aspect of God we have been offered in this life. He is manifest thru the Fruit of the Spirit and in Spiritual gifts. I would explain but after such indepth knoweledge of the bible i am sure you know what i am talking about or at least how to find it.

I see, so we are fools for expecting the inerrant word of God to be... inerrant?

Maybe you are fools for assuming the bible claims to be inerrant. Again this is another catholic doctrine that does not have a scriptural basis. lest you can provide book chapter and verse. In 15 years have you ever come across such a verse? no?? then can it be said you are foolish for assuming such a thing?

I followed the map and found lies, myths, and legends.

Am I just to take what you have said on faith?

I'm sure... your delusion promises that you're protected from them. That's its hold on you. It controls you by fear. It's a security blanket for adults.

no, I know i will die, and I know that for the role i have taken i will be judge and scrutinized far more harshly than any of you (except for Xpastor, if what he says is true He and I are in the same boat) To which if the dream i had was any indication I am still Hell bound.
even so, i have no fear. Heaven or hell has no bite. I am simply choosing to be faithful to what i have been given, and damn the consenquences.

Once again, only in your delusion. There is no such place and accountability to who? Your invented titan? Surely not.

Surly you have not put fourth such a great effort to justify yourself to me, a stranger you would not know from the next person... I have found that You and people like you tend to use me and people like me as practice for your own justifications to said 'titan.'

Now which is it that you believe in? Hell... or the second death. You can't believe in both.

Why not (book chapter and verse please.)
None of your catholic religious crap.

Again you're kind of pissing in your own yard with this logic. You're admitting that religion controls you by fear here. Submit or burn. And death is a very natural fear in all living things.

I did not say religions don't rule by fear, the closer one gets to the R/C church the more fear is used.

In the beginning of faith Fear is understandable, for the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom. However after one mature spiritually/In the Spirit fear is replace by Love.

No it isn't. You cannot separate Jesus from the tyrant Yahweh.

Again you do not even seem to have the most basic understanding of Christianity, so then how can you claim mastery of it?

The reason Christ died on a cross is take the full brunt of God's wrath set against us, leaving only love. It is because of Jesus we can Love and not fear God.

Really? Where are they?

At the edge of creation.

What did they look like?

A black pit.

Can you show them to me?

I bet you will see them sooner or later.

Are you claiming to have had visions? Do we need to call a mental health professional?

I call them dreams, the difference is accuracy. i have no way of verifying them so in this life they remain dreams.

Because they creators see man as sick and twisted. God must be above that. He must be more pure and good than we are. And even our best moral ideals must pale in comparison to his.

why? Our 'morality' is ever changing and without being tied to absolutes like God is, we will eventually be outside of God's morality. That is the very nature of self righteousness or do you not understand this principle either?

We aren't talking about which type of death. We are talking about whether man wins God acknowledges works or just faith.

James clarifies that empty faith is not what is being asked of us. people did not understand what the word meant/means given the context God was looking for. Faith goes beyond just simple acknoweledgement or rather people like you want to confuse faith and general acknoweledgement. james pointed out that the brand of Faith god is looking for is accompanied by works. that said it is not the works God holds value on, but the Faith that inspired said works.