A discussion around family table.

[fr0d0]

The 10 commandments were given to a people who needed rules to live by after emerging from slavery to the Egyptians.

Why wouldn't God have given them perfected rules then? Why give them defective ones? I'm really beginning to doubt this god's skills you know. Why didn't he do it right the first time? And please don't say it was in context for the time. Injustice and cruelty are never ok just because of what year it happens to be. That's insane.

Why do you presume to know what God should do? All of time is already known to God. History unfolds and God acts as and when he chooses... when the time is right.

We are not 'under' the rules but liberated 'by' them.

No. Rules are a restriction of freedom. When it's a good and just rule, it restricts only the freedom to harm others like in murder or theft. When it's a bad rule, like your god's rule against thinking nice thoughts about other gods, that also is a restriction of freedom, but an injust restriction. so, just or not, it's still a restriction of a freedom. How on earth does following your god's rules liberate? Are you referring to the freedom from being penalized should you not have followed the rules?

Rules in society enable the vast majority to enjoy safety. Children in anarchy are unhappy without boundaries. Once they know where the limits are, they can play happily. God cannot be unjust... or your're not referencing the Judaic Christian God. Other Gods are corruptions of the idea of God. You're allowed to believe or not... that's your freedom - to be an idiot or follow the rules. It's the same with criminal justice - you can choose to be good or choose to be bad and invoke the possibility of punishment. Only difference is... Gods justice is true and absolute. Man's justice is potentially flawed.

Nah, too much work, and anyways, I think you know full well it's all there.

No, I know it isn't there. Hence the request.

Nah, still too much work to go find quotes and chapter references. I'm content with you pretending that the stuff in the bible isn't there and that I'm making it up.

If you can't back up what you're saying then you should STFU. Respectfully

See the bible says it doesn't matter if your umbrella has holes. you're still forgiven. Pretty nice huh?

No, it's not nice. I did nothing wrong. What is there to forgive? Not only is that not nice, but it's fucking unpleasant. Some god gets all jealous that I partied in my thoughts with my brain fairies, threatens me with eternal torture, and then says he'll forgive me? What the fuck kind of creep would do that? You forgot to mention of course, that in order to get that oh so nice forgiveness, the victim must do some major apologizing/asskissing/agreement-to-start-worshipping, etc. If your god was going to end up forgiving everyone because he's not really such a mean guy as to torture people forever, why would there even be the hell you believe exists? Is hell a metaphor meant to keep us humans in line since we are too stupid to understand common sense instead?

This is a basic truth we're talking about you denying. To that truth, you are choosing rebellion... and then expect no consequences. How dishonest would it be if you were allowed to break the law without consequences? If you understand common sense, you'd have no problem with this.

I don't think disobeying the many silly demands like worship are detrimental. Do you?

I'd say it's usually detrimental to others, but then that's changing the subject : you. It's not so much a demand, and a natural response to give credit where it's due. If a person was all take and no give, I guess you'd consider them poorly. Same applies here... should you be considered favourably or unfavourably?

Please prove how me not worshipping your god is detrimental to others around me. As for giving credit, why? If your god proved to me that he made the universe and is instilling his cruel and unnecessary rules for me to live under, why should I let him know I give him credit for it, is he worried that I will claim it as my own? This is ridiculous. Remember also, that the xtian god does not just want acknowlegement of his feats, he also wants praise for them. Praise. About a cruel and nonsensical reward/punishment system. Come on, really! I'm not good at self delusion, but if I thought hell were real, I'd be scared enough to give it a good try. You bet I would think nice thoughts about him. Maybe I'd even try to masturbate about him! Nah, he's pretty ugly in every pic I've seen. I take that part back!

Do you have some personal problem you want to share? Your rant here is so illogical it's obsessive.

In that you say God is natural. Since your god is not found in nature at all, well, you know...

where are you looking?

"Actual existence" is a question of empirical knowledge. Only an idiot would require empirical knowledge of a non temporal entity. Is that you?

I must be, that is if being an idiot means I think you are completely saying the above as an excuse for having zero zip nadda zilch squat evidence, or even any indicators that any gods exist, much less your particular variation of one who needs one earth species to telepathically reassure him that he is the cat's pajamas.

Well thanks for clearing that up.

[Scented Nectar]

Why wouldn't God have given them perfected rules then? Why give them defective ones? I'm really beginning to doubt this god's skills you know. Why didn't he do it right the first time? And please don't say it was in context for the time. Injustice and cruelty are never ok just because of what year it happens to be. That's insane.

Why do you presume to know what God should do? All of time is already known to God. History unfolds and God acts as and when he chooses... when the time is right.

Oh dear, you said it anyways, even though it is insane. No matter whether your god is torturing people forever for noncrimes, or killing their offspring while they are alive because they are not the correct religion (passover), God is always a swell guy. He must have a good reason. You worship a really sick fucker. In fact you worship him despite admitting you don't know why he does anything. What is it about him you are admiring so much?

Rules in society enable the vast majority to enjoy safety. Children in anarchy are unhappy without boundaries. Once they know where the limits are, they can play happily.

We are not talking about common sense rules. We are talking about moronic, unfair ones where if you don't think nice thoughts about the person threatening you, you will be tortured forever. Seriously, stop pretending we are talking about good rules.

God cannot be unjust... or your're not referencing the Judaic Christian God.

See what you are doing here? Your religion is the only right one, and all others are inferior because they are not just. Not only that, but you are backing a god that has been proven bigtime to be unjust.

Other Gods are corruptions of the idea of God.

Yeah, yeah, yours is the only true way, blah blah.

You're allowed to believe or not... that's your freedom - to be an idiot or follow the rules.

No you're not. If you really had that freedom, there wouldn't be the threat of eternal torture as punishment for making the non-favoured-by-god choice. Also, belief is not a choice, unless you are into self-delusion and successful at it to boot. If god wanted us to believe in him, he'd provide clear unquestionable evidence, especially if the eternal future and happiness of his children were at stake, I mean really!

It's the same with criminal justice - you can choose to be good or choose to be bad and invoke the possibility of punishment. Only difference is... Gods justice is true and absolute. Man's justice is potentially flawed.

If you want to compare the god law system with modern secular criminal justice, god loses bigtime. You don't really want to go there, do you?????

If you can't back up what you're saying then you should STFU. Respectfully

Not when it comes to the many thought crimes of the bible. They are too well known for me to have to prove to you, much less go to the work of searching and collecting them all. It's preferable to me that you instead deny that you believe me. That is less unpleasant than looking up well known shit would be.

This is a basic truth we're talking about you denying. To that truth, you are choosing rebellion... and then expect no consequences. How dishonest would it be if you were allowed to break the law without consequences? If you understand common sense, you'd have no problem with this.

What truth? There is no evidence at all that it is real. And common sense has nothing to do with it, unlike modern secular law. Bible law is unchanging and forever binding, keeping the cruelties forever on the belief that it must be right even though it doesn't feel right, because god wants it that way, and who are we to question perfect god. At least though, it looks like you are admitting that you follow god-law because you are scared of the penalty, not because you necessarily agree with the morals behind the individual laws.

Please prove how me not worshipping your god is detrimental to others around me. As for giving credit, why? If your god proved to me that he made the universe and is instilling his cruel and unnecessary rules for me to live under, why should I let him know I give him credit for it, is he worried that I will claim it as my own? This is ridiculous. Remember also, that the xtian god does not just want acknowlegement of his feats, he also wants praise for them. Praise. About a cruel and nonsensical reward/punishment system. Come on, really! I'm not good at self delusion, but if I thought hell were real, I'd be scared enough to give it a good try. You bet I would think nice thoughts about him. Maybe I'd even try to masturbate about him! Nah, he's pretty ugly in every pic I've seen. I take that part back!

Do you have some personal problem you want to share? Your rant here is so illogical it's obsessive.

You don't get my point? Seriously? The point is how unjust and egotistically insane it would be to command people to think good emotions about you at the threat of torture if they don't. What the fuck?

In that you say God is natural. Since your god is not found in nature at all, well, you know...

where are you looking?

I was responding to your claim that god is natural. If you are trying to hint you can't see natural-god by looking at nature, then you are beyond help. Is that what you are trying to say? Trying to get out of answering the dilemma of a natural god not being found anywhere in nature?

[fr0d0]

Oh dear, you said it anyways, even though it is insane.

Baseless assertion

We are not talking about common sense rules. We are talking about moronic, unfair ones where if you don't think nice thoughts about the person threatening you, you will be tortured forever. Seriously, stop pretending we are talking about good rules.

I've proved to you why these "rules" are not moronic or unfair. You have no argument against that apparently.

God cannot be unjust... or your're not referencing the Judaic Christian God.

See what you are doing here? Your religion is the only right one, and all others are inferior because they are not just. Not only that, but you are backing a god that has been proven bigtime to be unjust.

All theological consideration has merit. I'm open to any ideas, and discriminate against none. the Christian concept happens to be my personal choice and is the subject of my belief. If the concept of a god, as it is with Christian theology, is the embodiment of positivism, then this positivism is self evident. You're summation of an opposite set of values simply can't fit in my scenario. I'm not demeaning other religions at all.

You're allowed to believe or not... that's your freedom - to be an idiot or follow the rules.

No you're not. If you really had that freedom, there wouldn't be the threat of eternal torture as punishment for making the non-favoured-by-god choice. Also, belief is not a choice, unless you are into self-delusion and successful at it to boot. If god wanted us to believe in him, he'd provide clear unquestionable evidence, especially if the eternal future and happiness of his children were at stake, I mean really!

So a person has no freedom to be a criminal by your logic. No freedom to be anything but law abiding.

I certainly don't believe in God out of fear. the threat of eternal punishment and reward mean less than nothing to me. I understand that spiritual life and death affects my life now. And I choose life. I have the complete freedom to choose spiritual death if I wan't to. How that pans out after I'm dead --- I'm sorry... I simply couldn't care less.

How could God giving you no choice to believe in him or not work? The point of Christianity is faith. The point is your complete freedom to choose.

How does your scenario equate to happiness? You're being incredibly egocentric putting human happiness or suffering above the wider interests of the sum of reality.

It's the same with criminal justice - you can choose to be good or choose to be bad and invoke the possibility of punishment. Only difference is... Gods justice is true and absolute. Man's justice is potentially flawed.

If you want to compare the god law system with modern secular criminal justice, god loses bigtime. You don't really want to go there, do you?????

Yep. God is just. God NEVER acts unlawfully. God never murders... only takes life justly. Human justice is seriously and pretty completely flawed in comparison. It's laughable that you think you stand a chance against the concept of goodness versus human achievement towards such. No human endeavour is absolutely perfect. God is absolutely perfect. No contest.

If you can't back up what you're saying then you should STFU. Respectfully

Not when it comes to the many thought crimes of the bible. They are too well known for me to have to prove to you, much less go to the work of searching and collecting them all. It's preferable to me that you instead deny that you believe me. That is less unpleasant than looking up well known shit would be.

You can quote the whole of the skeptics annotated bible if you like. Not one point sticks.

This is a basic truth we're talking about you denying. To that truth, you are choosing rebellion... and then expect no consequences. How dishonest would it be if you were allowed to break the law without consequences? If you understand common sense, you'd have no problem with this.

What truth? There is no evidence at all that it is real. And common sense has nothing to do with it, unlike modern secular law. Bible law is unchanging and forever binding, keeping the cruelties forever on the belief that it must be right even though it doesn't feel right, because god wants it that way, and who are we to question perfect god. At least though, it looks like you are admitting that you follow god-law because you are scared of the penalty, not because you necessarily agree with the morals behind the individual laws.

The truth is the choice between positivity and negativity. You seem to think the choice isn't free. That the inherent negative consequences restrict your freedom to choose negativity. And you think that there's no evidence that this is 'real'? Seems like common sense to me(?)

The morality outlined in the bible is 100% condoned by me. I don't know where you get the idea that I don't agree with it. It does indeed 'feel right' because that's what it is.

I was responding to your claim that god is natural. If you are trying to hint you can't see natural-god by looking at nature, then you are beyond help. Is that what you are trying to say? Trying to get out of answering the dilemma of a natural god not being found anywhere in nature?

I was saying that these are natural laws, and not that God is natural. In my belief, God created this reality, including nature and natural laws. As everything came from God, part of him is in everything... this is just logic. The basic, root concept of God is creator and positive force. Your view of god being the opposite is unsupportable logically and falls flat as soon as you consider it. You don't have to believe in God, and that can be a logically sound position. To try to put it down with such illogic as your espousing is detrimental to your stance on religion.

[Scented Nectar]

Oh dear, you said it anyways, even though it is insane.

Baseless assertion

No. The basis is that it is clearly an insane word game. You can say anything at all, completely making it up, and then say 'see, it's really a metaphor for a metaphor for a metaphor for a....' Cuckoo. Loonytunes. Bring out the funny jacket and soft walls time.

We are not talking about common sense rules. We are talking about moronic, unfair ones where if you don't think nice thoughts about the person threatening you, you will be tortured forever. Seriously, stop pretending we are talking about good rules.

I've proved to you why these "rules" are not moronic or unfair. You have no argument against that apparently.

You've proved no such thing. It would be impossible to prove such unecessary cruelty as being fair. If you really think something you wrote convinced me, what was it?

God cannot be unjust... or your're not referencing the Judaic Christian God.

See what you are doing here? Your religion is the only right one, and all others are inferior because they are not just. Not only that, but you are backing a god that has been proven bigtime to be unjust.

All theological consideration has merit. I'm open to any ideas, and discriminate against none. the Christian concept happens to be my personal choice and is the subject of my belief. If the concept of a god, as it is with Christian theology, is the embodiment of positivism, then this positivism is self evident. You're summation of an opposite set of values simply can't fit in my scenario. I'm not demeaning other religions at all.

You are claiming that your god is always just, and that any unjust god must be some other religion's god. Why are you living in such a free godless society? You should move to a muslim country, as they are currently the best ones at enforcing the nice rules of the Abrahamic god you like so much in their theocratically run countries. As close to biblegod's word as you will find nowadays and it's the same god anyways.

So a person has no freedom to be a criminal by your logic. No freedom to be anything but law abiding.

Not according to your god. When one choice carries a punishment and the other reward, it takes away from pure choice. It influences the decision to favour choosing the one associated with the reward and avoidance of the punishment, instead of being based on the original choice itself. This is not rocket science. Hey, you are free NOT to give me your wallet when I point a gun at you, and if you are smart you probably will give me the wallet. Doesn't make you a criminal though if you say no, run away and I shoot you anyways. I am still the criminal for making you have to have this horrible 'choice'. And you would be quite right to think poorly of my morals for doing this unfair thing to you. Or not, after all, you are accepting that if biblegod diddit, his morals are good, very good.

I certainly don't believe in God out of fear. the threat of eternal punishment and reward mean less than nothing to me.

Then you are in it for the much worse reason of actually liking the main character in the bible. Iccck. You probably shouldn't admit that to too many people. You won't be allowed near disobedient children or in restaurants where people wear multi-fabrics.

I understand that spiritual life and death affects my life now. And I choose life. I have the complete freedom to choose spiritual death if I wan't to. How that pans out after I'm dead --- I'm sorry... I simply couldn't care less.

You should care if you are really a christian. The whole point of your religion is to live in a manner to avoid eternal hellfire and to earn God's loving reward of heaven and his holy company for eternity. Otherwise, what are you sucking up for?

How could God giving you no choice to believe in him or not work? The point of Christianity is faith. The point is your complete freedom to choose.

No. If that were the case, there wouldn't be such a lack of evidence of gods, and such a huge amount of evidence against any and all specific ones, since these things make the choice hugely unfair in favour of the not believing side. It makes it unfair because the human brain will often see the logic and plausibility of things instead of choosing to believe something on faith and in the face of such implausibility it would be stupid to conclude anything other than your magical invisible creator deity who wants humans to behave differently than how he made them to behave is not real. You have to make an effort to convince yourself of something your natural common sense and all the evidence says is a ridiculous concept to consider more than a passing thought of drunken moment's pondering on life. Like my marijuana inspired flower fairies, you know? I'm not about to make an effort to convince myself such a silly thing must be true despite everything pointing against it. I made up the silly concept in giggle moment. And you know what? It has every bit as much credibility as your god, even more since plant and multi-god/spirit worship predated your monotheistic version of the supernatural.

How does your scenario equate to happiness? You're being incredibly egocentric putting human happiness or suffering above the wider interests of the sum of reality.

Yeah, how dare I put the real life happiness and welfare of my fellow humans before the emotional need for telepathic reassurance of a magical creature I've never seen or even met because he might get mad if I don't.

Yep. God is just. God NEVER acts unlawfully. God never murders... only takes life justly. Human justice is seriously and pretty completely flawed in comparison. It's laughable that you think you stand a chance against the concept of goodness versus human achievement towards such. No human endeavour is absolutely perfect. God is absolutely perfect. No contest.

Wow!!!!! You are a scary person. I hope you've truly convinced yourself of all that so your god doesn't punish you. If he knows that you don't really approve of his morals and are just trying to trick both yourself and him, he'll send you to hell anyways. No, don't worry. Hell's not real.

The truth is the choice between positivity and negativity. You seem to think the choice isn't free. That the inherent negative consequences restrict your freedom to choose negativity. And you think that there's no evidence that this is 'real'? Seems like common sense to me(?)

Your common sense is nothing more than a what-if-it's-true fear. Anyways, your god would not torture you for letting yourself experience the very natural negative thoughts we all have, would he? If such thoughts offended him that much, he wouldn't have created them in us, much less punish us for having what he gave us. Unless your god is a sociopathic lunatic. Is he?

The morality outlined in the bible is 100% condoned by me. I don't know where you get the idea that I don't agree with it. It does indeed 'feel right' because that's what it is.

So, if there were no legal penalties against enforcing the following, can I assume you would jump at the chance to kill me for choosing to have sex outside of the 'marriage' I am sold into as a child, killed again for any bisexual adventures I may have had, and killed again for doing something you consider work on your sabbath, and killed again for wearing both cotton and hemp at the same time? I don't think you'd be my first choice of what internet friends I'd like to meet in real life. You want to kill most of the people in the world. I hope you are being kept away from dangerous machinery and bomb materials. After all, even with the modern secular rules to somewhat protect me from criminals like you, you probably think following your godlaws takes priority over the human ones.

I was saying that these are natural laws, and not that God is natural.

Word games again. It is but it isn't.

In my belief, God created this reality, including nature and natural laws. As everything came from God, part of him is in everything... this is just logic.

No, it's your faith. Stop calling it logic. Faith is the opposite of using logic to come to your decisions. Stop pretending to be using logic.

The basic, root concept of God is creator and positive force. Your view of god being the opposite is unsupportable logically and falls flat as soon as you consider it.

Then how come you can't prove this claim or even outline the logic you say you are using?

You don't have to believe in God, and that can be a logically sound position. To try to put it down with such illogic as your espousing is detrimental to your stance on religion.

No, it's detrimental to your stance on religion. Logically derived conclusions never go against my religious beliefs because I don't have any religious beliefs. There is nothing I believe on faith alone, so there are no faith beliefs there to debunk with logic. Also, note that if you were to actually prove any religious/supernatural claim at all, it would no longer require faith to believe it, but would use logic/evidence from then on for its belief.

[Watson]

No, the metaphor would be the fictional representation of the nonfictional element.

Which is what the Bible puts forward. A fictional representation of a nonfictional being and it's attributes and teachings.

If the lessons of nonharmful behaviour being deserving of death at the hands of followers, and other equally horrible lessons are real, then the bible should be considered hate literature.

This is not the message of God, and only parts of the Bible propogate it as such. These parts of the Bible are wrong.

God is being presented as a nonfictional element rather than a metaphor if it explains how he works.

Yeah...exactly?

So these horrible lessons can't be metaphors for yet something else.

The lessons are the underlying metaphor. And said lessons are the teachings of God, represented as accurately as possible by man.

If readers can relate to it, then there would be no argument, no debate, no questioning even, as to exactly what the bible is saying humans should do, and what is real vs metaphor and if the latter what's it mean, and the many contradictions, etc.

Wrong. It is human nature to interpret and misinterpret, because perception is what each man, woman, child, or what-have-you makes of it.

Here's an example:
The popular science fiction writer, Ray Bradbury, is the author of the book Fahrenheit 451 and has spent a lot of time giving lectures on it. The book is about a distant future where books are burned and censored to all hell. It was written in the 1950s. The metaphor is of this societies degrading moral value and of the censorship running rampant within America. Lo and behold, a lot of the things within the book came true 50 years later.

But more to the point, Ray once gave a lecture on this book to a class, and they tried to tell him what it was all about. Obviously, as the author, he knew exactly what he had intended and he told them that they were wrong. They actually continued with their arguments and tried to tell him what his book was about.

This is a display and example of how humans persist in their deluded misinterpretations of any sort of literature, regardless of the actual author's intent. So you can point fingers and say "It should be crystal clear!" all you want, but unfortunately do to mankind and his nature, it is not. We are the ones who make it as such, and it is up to the rest of the world to correct the mistakes and set things right.

If mere mortal sinful humans have fucked up the holy word of god so bad that the bible is now unclear, why on earth are you following it at all?

The message is not unclear if you have already observed it's truth in the real world. I am not following the Bible, I am following God; it just so happens that the source I most often refer to in regards to a fixed reference for God's nature is the Bible.

Find your own answers, not ones from a messed up, inaccurate, often-made-up, uneducated source with a hidden political/financial theocratically-founded agenda like the Abrahamic religions.

I have. And in doing so, I have also seen the truth that lies within the Abrahamic religions. I have also been exposed to the truth that lies within other religions, too.

The world has unfortunately seen, and continues to see the result of humans applying the 'facts' of the bible to real life. Not a good track record, I'm afraid.

Did you completely ignore my statements about backwards application? The process goes like this; apply real life observations to the Bible-->Bible makes more sense-->apply the Bible to real life.

The Bible itself is not a necessity, it is simply there for those who truly have found belief to have a fixed reference when attempting to understand God. We don't need it, but it helps every now and then.

What lessons? Really, what? Specifically. And exclusive to the bible please, eg, almost every religion and nonreligious philosophy has some variation of the don't do to others empathy rule.

Exactly my point. Why do the lessons I've learned have to be exclusive to the Bible? They can be learned merely by walking the path of life and observing the way it works around you. The do to others empathy rule is a prime example of this. It works. It can be applied to real life. The Bible is documenting that, not setting out to invent that rule.

I'm very interested to know the lessons only the bible can provide.

Again, that's the point; not only the Bible can provide these lessons, a simple observation of man and the way he works, and life and the way it happens can provide these lessons. The Bible is merely a record of those observations from those men who wished to write about God in their time.

Also, I hope you don't just say something like, well it's different for everyone.

Don't worry, I wont.

Uh uh, we are not talking about a self help book here,

Yes, in a way actually, we are.

we are talking about a set of laws and commands, to be enforced on everyone, believers/nonbelievers alike to affect us our whole lives. And for you believers, you think it will also affect you after you die and forever.

No, we are not talking about a set of laws or commands to be enforced. We are talking about a set of observations on human nature and the laws that apply there. For example, the scientific law of gravity is recorded as being true in science text books everywhere, because we can observe gravity and we know it applies to everyone and everything. Similarly, the Bible is a reference for the laws of human nature and God, and their effects on man as he walks about through his life and encounters certain scenarios.

Ok, then when referring to the bible, who are the lizards and who are the commies?

The literal stories are the lizards, the lessons learned from them are the commies.

If the bible had an important message, it wouldn't play around with metaphors.

Again, yes it would, because it is much easier to represent an almost incomprehensible being, God, and an individual's experience with Him to someone who doesn't already understand or wasn't there when the experience was had, through metaphorical stories instead.

And in fact it didn't.

Yes, it did.

The writers meant for it to be taken quite seriously and factually.

The existence of God and His effects on the world, sure. Just like the writers of a scientific text book, when writing about gravity, use made up stories to demonstrate how gravity works.

You only want it to be metaphorical because you are trying to make it fit into your own personal life and morals and stuff.

No, I want it to be metaphorical, because it clearly is metaphorical.

No you haven't. You have observed real life and chalked it up to one version (xtian) of one specific supernatural cause (invisible creator deities) out of the zillions of supernatural causes that the human brain can make up and wonder about.

Where did I claim that the Christian God is the one true God? If you've ever read any of my posts here, you know that I've stated multiple times that I believe all religions to be a attempt at describing the same phenomenon. I choose Christianity as my default because I find it to be the best and most far-reaching descriptor of the phenomenon known as life/ God.

]If it's a metaphor, how do you know it's accurate?

Because it matches my observations of the real world.

And what particular metaphorical depiction(s) of God are you referring to? An example here would be nice.

I'll quote fr0do from a completely different topic here:

God is one. (Deut. 6:4, Romans 3:30, Galatians 3:20, James 2:19)
God is holy. (Psalm 99:9)
God is spirit. (John 4:24)
God is light. (1 John 1:5)
God is love. (1 John 4:8, 1 John 4:16)

So, how did they know anything about God?

Because they had observed Him already in their daily lives, and did their best to record the lessons and experiences they had had in a way that others would understand. Once more, I go back to the gravity example on this one. You wouldn't write in a science text book "One time, I was on my way to work, and I saw an apple fall off of a tree" as proof of gravity or as a demonstration of how gravity works.

It's even worse if the metaphors were made up by mere humans, since the very message is whatever the fuck they were thinking at the time.

The stories themselves were completely made up; the truth they allude to, though alluding to it metaphorically, is still true/real.

Your understanding doesn't count.

Why not? Especially if my understanding is based on observations of real life and the world around me, rather than any preconceptions I have formed about the world?

You can say that to excuse anything immoral or magical in that book.

Replace the word 'excuse' with 'explain', and you've got what I'm attempting to do.

Let's go by what it actually says.

I am. You are not.

If you agree with biblegod's morals and laws to follow on earth, then you are a threat to my life and well being and basic freedom.

If I am taking it literally.

It's a hideous book.

If taken literally.

The accidental time period one is born into, is no justification for that group to deserve suffering.

No, it is not. That is why I have said numerous times that the Bible is not completely accurate. For some reason, you can't seem to understand this. You're still arguing with a fundamentalist, when I certainly am not one. Are you incapable of comprehending new arguments or ideas, and dealing with them accordingly? I can't understand for the life of me why.

Anyways, even your Jesus said something about not abolishing these old laws, but to do the opposite and 'fulfill' them, make them happen, enforce them. Even gave shit to someone for not killing their disobedient children somewhere in there.

LOL @ 'your Jesus.'

Yes, that is true, that is written in the Bible. I've not read that particular part, so I'm taking your word for it here. And I also trust you have complete knowledge and understanding of the context and meaning within which all this was said? Or the context within which it was written?

Let's put it this way; you wouldn't expect a republican publication to glorify democratic values and decry republican ones, would you? Better yet, you wouldn't expect a book written during the time of slavery to understand completely why slavery is wrong, would you?

No, it goes further back than the monotheistic Abrahamic god.

Of this I am aware.

There is a theory that the Adam and Eve story represented the judeochristian takeover of the previous gnostic and other religions, Eve representing goddess worship common in many of them, and the forbidden tree of life representing the political control over possible earlier shamanic use of cannabis (the jews restricted the oil-anointing and smoke-inhaling of 'cannabosm' to priests and kings they approved of, and the xtians later stopping it altogether), etc. It's plausible as a theory for how the religious misogyny of the last few thousand years or so came about.

I seriously don't understand what this has to do with anything at all. Seriously.

But even that all goes back further. Xtianity doesn't have it's own starting point.

Except, you know, Christ.

Holidays and many concepts were taken and adapted from various other pre-existing religions. And who knows what speculative deity concepts they came from in earlier times.

Just going to show that all religions are somewhat convergent in ideals and observations. The divergent points come usualy when human politics get involved.

There is no need to add a god-filter to the world. No need at all.

I am not 'adding a god-filter' to the world. I am observing the world through belief and faith- in myself, in others, and in thsi world around me- and finding the evidence of God all around me in doing so. I am adding belief to the world, and finding that it has accurate and beneficial results.

And what are some of the many, many indications to you that God exists? Seriously, what? And don't be vague.

Remember how we talked about how you wouldn't use "I was on my way to work one time and an apple fell down" as proof of gravity? Similarly, I cannot use any of my subjective experieces to prove to your subjectivity that God exists. Unless you had been there, you didn't 'see the apple fall', so to speak.

One example, however, would be that I have found indication of what love is and experienced it's existence, and have discovered it to be coinsiding with what God is meant to be as well. Remember:

God is love. (1 John 4:8, 1 John 4:16)

Even mere mortal rock stars lose respect for fans who worship and adore ad nauseum. Why would your god even like you doing that to him. It is creepy in a stalker sort of way.

This is a ridiculous argument. You don't understand God, as I've said a hundred ka-jillion times by now, so you also don't understand off-shoots of God, such as what it means to 'worship' God.

God is all of life. God is everything. To 'worship' and love God is to love and adore and bask in all of life's grace as best as one can.

What are the good morals in the bible?

Read it yourself. I'm not spoon feeding you, here.

And where in the bible does it say there is a hidden true meaning and that you will find it by applying your personal experiences/observations to it?

Simple common sense dictates that there is a true meaning behind the Bible and that you will find it by applying real life observances/experiences to it.

If you didn't know what communists even were, would you know and understand what the book about lizards was referencing?

Then you can't not believe that the christian bible is true.

I believe the Bible is true, to a point. You are confusing the words 'true' and 'literal' with each other.

You are cherry picking the bible, and adding hidden meanings that you like, and all kinds of excuses to deny that fact that you are not really a christian.

I live my life in a Christ-like manner, therefore, I am a Christian. With all due respect, shut up. You have shown an immense lack of understanding, and inability to cope with, the theology behind the Christian Bible. You can say I 'cherry-pick' it all you like; doing so does not make me any less of a Christian, because I am simply recognizing the falliability of man and the fact that anything he writes is inherrantly falliable, as well. You don't read a book and agree with every single thing the author has to say within it, do you? Exactly.

Furthermore, do you define a patriot as any less than a patriot if he criticizes his government? No, I would think that he is more of a patriot, because he is trying to get something done and change where he finds fault with the current government.

Shit. Jesus Christ Himself is depicted within the Bible as critical of the church!

You are obviously a deist, but you don't believe the bible to be true or accurate, even though you like its morals.

I believe in the lessos taught and the observations made within the Bible.

You claim the supernatural/illogical parts are metaphors, etc so you are not a believer in it, are you? Is Jesus's resurrection a metaphor?

I believe in the message behind Jesus Christ, behind His ressurection, and behind the lessons taught within the Bible. You are confusing 'believe' with 'knowing.'

Who cares about who understands it or not. Real life suffering results (and for believers, eternity as well). That book should at least come with a disclaimer, do not do this in real life. We don't really mean it for real when we say to kill or rule over these or those people.

And again; you would not call someone during the time of slavery out for writing a book about slavery, would you? You wouldn't write a review about that book decrying it's advocation of slavery, would you? You would just acknowledge that that book is out-dated morally, and move on.

No it doesn't. That was to include other additional possible reasons that people might believe in hell, such as those with self-worthiness issues who feel they deserve punishment for some reason and figure there must be one waiting for them, etc.

And what I am saying is that you do not understand the metaphor or message behind 'Hell', so you cannot be expected to understand it's tenants or how one gets there.

I have found Hell to be very real, by the way. I have lived it, and it is quite terrible. But again, you still have no understanding of what Hell or Heaven truly are, so it is quite impossible to discuss them with you until you do.

You have not lived the christian hell.

[/quote]
You do not understand the Christian Hell. You show an enormous misunderstanding, already, of the messages behind the Bible and it's meanings. How do you, an Atheist, know for certain what the Christian Hell is? Understanding what the Christian Hell is requires an understanding of Christianity, which you have shown you do not possess.

You are not even dead yet.

The Bible is all about spirituality, and the lessons one learns throughout life that can be applied to spiritual health, spiritual wellness, and spiritual discipline. To be in Hell, one does not have to physically die; spiritual death can have the same effect, as well. This is what I have experienced. Spiritual death. It is not pleasant.

You don't get to call real life bad times, which everyone gets no matter what one's belief in dities, the christian hell.
Hell in the xtian bible happens after death,

After spiritual death.

and whether you are sent there is determined by what God thinks of what you did and thought while you were alive on Earth. No making shit up, or you are not really a christian.

God is a part of all things. Even you, and even me. That's what one's soul is, the part of the human being most connected to God. This is a Christian belief. This is why, when you do bad things, you feel bad; your soul, the part of you that is most in-tune with God, is punishing you because it knows better than you do what is right and wrong. You have the final say in what your own punishment is, because your soul is in tune with God and knows what is bad or good. When you do good, your soul makes you feel good; when you do bad, your soul makes you feel bad.

Well, the definition of being a Christian is to be Christ-like. That is why it is calld Christianity. So, yes, anyone not acting Christ-like is not a real Christian in the simplest sense of the word.

The only rulebook on how to be christ-like is the christian bible. So, lather rinse repeat.

Not exactly. Being Christ-like means being Christ-like; anyone living on this Earth can discover that leading a Christ-like life is beneficial to one's state of mind, body, and spirit. The Bible is simply a record of that observation.

The Bible is all about the intent. Most books are. Some parts of the Bible are written with the intent of being honest, sincere observations about human nature as it relates to God, the ways in which God works, and God's attributes. Other parts, because of the falliability of man, are written with political control in mind. Man is always looking for ways of controlling other men. Unfortunately, religion is just another of many ways he can do this.

[Scented Nectar]

If the lessons of nonharmful behaviour being deserving of death at the hands of followers, and other equally horrible lessons are real, then the bible should be considered hate literature.

This is not the message of God, and only parts of the Bible propogate it as such. These parts of the Bible are wrong.

Then everything but all the 'begats' has to go, and even those are pretty suspect since people just did not live to 900 years old or whatever back then.

The lessons are the underlying metaphor. And said lessons are the teachings of God, represented as accurately as possible by man.

You have no way of knowing that God is not a metaphor (like for evil and abuse of authority) and so therefore the teachings are metaphors too, like maybe for evil and cruel laws we should watch out for. How about that interpretation? You can't prove otherwise. God is a metaphor for evil that will trick you and tell you it's good.

The message is not unclear if you have already observed it's truth in the real world. I am not following the Bible, I am following God; it just so happens that the source I most often refer to in regards to a fixed reference for God's nature is the Bible.

If the bible is a fixed reference to you, then you ARE following the bible, and therefore the bible's version of what god is.

Did you completely ignore my statements about backwards application? The process goes like this; apply real life observations to the Bible-->Bible makes more sense-->apply the Bible to real life.

Lots of deaths and misery have resulted from people doing just that with your biblebook.

The Bible itself is not a necessity, it is simply there for those who truly have found belief to have a fixed reference when attempting to understand God. We don't need it, but it helps every now and then.

I'm glad you have no 'need' for it, in the food and water sense, because I think the book should be mega-mocked, stuck on a pole and displayed in the town square, and certainly not used for guidance. Too much very real harm has been done because of it, and for much too long.

What lessons? Really, what? Specifically. And exclusive to the bible please, eg, almost every religion and nonreligious philosophy has some variation of the don't do to others empathy rule.

Exactly my point. Why do the lessons I've learned have to be exclusive to the Bible? They can be learned merely by walking the path of life and observing the way it works around you. The do to others empathy rule is a prime example of this. It works. It can be applied to real life. The Bible is documenting that, not setting out to invent that rule.

Yeah, yeah, that's nice, so, um, about those lessons, what lessons specifically has the bible taught you? You are claiming to be a christian, so it's the book you hold above the others I'm talking about. It doesn't matter that some of the other religions and philosophies out there share some of the ideas/lessons with you. And I am hoping that those lessons you learned outweigh the horrible crimes committed in the name of that same book which has helped you so much, but even if they don't, I am curious as to what they are, preferable in the order of their importance to you.

Also, I hope you don't just say something like, well it's different for everyone.

Don't worry, I wont.

But you are if all the lessons are individual and not clearly the same for everyone.

Uh uh, we are not talking about a self help book here,

Yes, in a way actually, we are.

Then in that case, I expect it to do more help than harm, at the very least a neutral no-effect. The writings of the abrahamic god followers (of which the xtian bible is a part of) have caused serious fucking damage, and are continuing to do so, bigtime!

No, we are not talking about a set of laws or commands to be enforced. We are talking about a set of observations on human nature and the laws that apply there. For example, the scientific law of gravity is recorded as being true in science text books everywhere, because we can observe gravity and we know it applies to everyone and everything. Similarly, the Bible is a reference for the laws of human nature and God, and their effects on man as he walks about through his life and encounters certain scenarios.

I'll consider accepting your claim if you first prove to me that we can observe your god's effects on humans, which of course must also show that the god you claim as the causative element actually exists and is causing that effect. And I'm not talking about the psychological effects of having the concept or belief in a god, but the actual effects of a god itself. Then I will want to know why I should believe that this god is the same one the abrahamic religions refer to, and then I will consider it similar to how I consider documents that refer to gravity.

The writers meant for it to be taken quite seriously and factually.

The existence of God and His effects on the world, sure. Just like the writers of a scientific text book, when writing about gravity, use made up stories to demonstrate how gravity works.

No, you don't get to decide that for everyone. The bible does NOT say the god parts and effect descriptions are true, but the rest is not. And science books don't tend to use made up stories, unless of course it is prefaced by something like, 'the following fictional example is used here to display how such a resulting reaction of object weight on various shelf materials in relation to gravity's effects, and how they might take place in a household environment', etc.

You only want it to be metaphorical because you are trying to make it fit into your own personal life and morals and stuff.

No, I want it to be metaphorical, because it clearly is metaphorical.

Ok, fine, but I still can't take your word on it, and I still want to see where the bible makes that clear to me, not you. If it's a holy book, it should at least be clear about what it's messages and facts/metaphors are.

And what particular metaphorical depiction(s) of God are you referring to? An example here would be nice.

I'll quote fr0do from a completely different topic here:

God is one. (Deut. 6:4, Romans 3:30, Galatians 3:20, James 2:19)
God is holy. (Psalm 99:9)
God is spirit. (John 4:24)
God is light. (1 John 1:5)
God is love. (1 John 4:8, 1 John 4:16)

Hmm, all this time I thought one was just another number, love an emotion, and light a physics thing that I don't quite understand due to never having studied it much. Hang on a minute, I have to go turn on the God because it's kind of dark in here, and by the way, I just Goood that new painting you have on the wall, who made it? Teacher, the answer to 7x3 is twentyGod. Yikes, I think for the sake of debating about religions, I will stick to the part where God is a superbeing who created everything, is all loving, and omnipotent, and wants humans to do certain unecessary things such as think thoughts of praise about him, and wants them to do other things too, like help him fight the evil devil he created.

Because they had observed Him already in their daily lives, and did their best to record the lessons and experiences they had had in a way that others would understand. Once more, I go back to the gravity example on this one. You wouldn't write in a science text book "One time, I was on my way to work, and I saw an apple fall off of a tree" as proof of gravity or as a demonstration of how gravity works.

I'm not a scientist, but a science book would more likely have something like: Here at the Research Lab where the author of this report works, we observed that 100% of the apples in our samples (100,000 subject apple trees with an average of 150 apples each) fell at the moment they were no longer supported by the tree branch. This was observed by a team of 10 researchers, recorded on video as well as stop-motion still photography, and the floor onto which the apples fell had a scale which recorded the weight difference when they landed. Air friction slowdown was seen and recorded, in relation to the apples' individual sizes and shapes aligning completely without deviation to the mathematics of such friction, blah blah.

Let's go by what it actually says.

I am. You are not.

You've already admitted that you put it through your personal interpretation of what you think are metaphors and what they represent. I will stick to the pre-additional-filter stuff that the actual book itself says.

If you agree with biblegod's morals and laws to follow on earth, then you are a threat to my life and well being and basic freedom.

If I am taking it literally.

Even if you don't, the lessons to be evil to others is still there, the vengence, the justified persecutions, the slaughter, the slavery, etc.

Anyways, even your Jesus said something about not abolishing these old laws, but to do the opposite and 'fulfill' them, make them happen, enforce them. Even gave shit to someone for not killing their disobedient children somewhere in there.

Yes, that is true, that is written in the Bible. I've not read that particular part, so I'm taking your word for it here. And I also trust you have complete knowledge and understanding of the context and meaning within which all this was said? Or the context within which it was written?

Can you think of ANY context where killing disobedient children should be the rule? WTF?????

Better yet, you wouldn't expect a book written during the time of slavery to understand completely why slavery is wrong, would you?

I would if that book were claiming to be the path to happiness, goodness, and truth and change for the better, etc.

No, it goes further back than the monotheistic Abrahamic god.

Of this I am aware.

Then why do you worship a monotheistic god, instead of the original worship of many gods, or even the worship of things other than gods, like ancestors, animals spirits, etc.?

There is a theory that the Adam and Eve story represented the judeochristian takeover of the previous gnostic and other religions, Eve representing goddess worship common in many of them, and the forbidden tree of life representing the political control over possible earlier shamanic use of cannabis (the jews restricted the oil-anointing and smoke-inhaling of 'cannabosm' to priests and kings they approved of, and the xtians later stopping it altogether), etc. It's plausible as a theory for how the religious misogyny of the last few thousand years or so came about.

I seriously don't understand what this has to do with anything at all. Seriously.

For one thing, it shows that maybe the lizard tale wasn't about commies at all, but maybe about something completely different, and your head made it fit to what you wanted it to be. To you, the Adam and Eve story probably represents the battle against sin, but maybe it just represents one religion taking power from another religion and telling their followers that the old religion's gods were evil through a story. Just one of many many interpretations, and of course that means many or most will not have the commies as being the metaphor's meaning in their lizard story.

But even that all goes back further. Xtianity doesn't have it's own starting point.

Except, you know, Christ.

Then, you are claiming that some guy named Jesus Christ was really God. In other words, here you are taking the bible literally. The prediction of a coming messiah happened long before the xtian branching off 2000 years ago. The church found it politically and financially profitable to claim that it was really happening and that they are the right religion to follow. The details on whether a faked death/resurrection occurred, or whether it was completely just written fictually about a hundred years later are sketchy, but either way, it was very beneficial to the church's agenda of being the next theocracy. It worked too!

There is no need to add a god-filter to the world. No need at all.

I am not 'adding a god-filter' to the world. I am observing the world through belief and faith- in myself, in others, and in thsi world around me- and finding the evidence of God all around me in doing so. I am adding belief to the world, and finding that it has accurate and beneficial results.

Ok, so.... where is that evidence? What was shown to be accurate and how. Why would you need faith in observing anything? Doesn't that skew the results in favour of your predetermined faithbelief?

One example, however, would be that I have found indication of what love is and experienced it's existence, and have discovered it to be coinsiding with what God is meant to be as well. Remember:

God is love. (1 John 4:8, 1 John 4:16)

All that tells me is that you experienced love, not that an invisible universe creator exists.

God is all of life. God is everything. To 'worship' and love God is to love and adore and bask in all of life's grace as best as one can.

Nonsense, I bask and whatever in life without any need for a god or gods, so why would a person need an invisible friend to enjoy life to their best?

What are the good morals in the bible?

Read it yourself. I'm not spoon feeding you, here.

You're going to have to. I look and look, but can't find anything but shit in that book. Even the heroes who are portrayed as being really good and admirable (and the only ones considered worthy of saving by god) are awful people, like the sexual exploiters of their own children, Lot and Noah. Since you probably haven't actually read the bible, let me fill you in. To protect some visiting strangers to town, Lot offered up his virgin daughters to be raped by the male townfolk, and Noah got drunk and had sex with his own son.

And where in the bible does it say there is a hidden true meaning and that you will find it by applying your personal experiences/observations to it?

Simple common sense dictates that there is a true meaning behind the Bible and that you will find it by applying real life observances/experiences to it.

Explain this common sense please. I'm not seeing it. Maybe your god made me stupid, in which case would you be charitable please and explain this common sense to me, displaying clearly the hidden meaning?

Shit. Jesus Christ Himself is depicted within the Bible as critical of the church!

He was depicted as being slightly critical of the church that the new christ version was trying to take over from. The newer one kept most of the older one's dogmas to use as their own.

You claim the supernatural/illogical parts are metaphors, etc so you are not a believer in it, are you? Is Jesus's resurrection a metaphor?

I believe in the message behind Jesus Christ, behind His ressurection, and behind the lessons taught within the Bible. You are confusing 'believe' with 'knowing.'

I like the sentiment behind Hindu reluctance to hurt animals, but it does not make me a believer in their goddesses and gods. I would not call myself a Hindu.

And again; you would not call someone during the time of slavery out for writing a book about slavery, would you? You wouldn't write a review about that book decrying it's advocation of slavery, would you? You would just acknowledge that that book is out-dated morally, and move on.

Sounds good, I agree. Let's dump the bible and move on. It's 2010 people.

You do not understand the Christian Hell. You show an enormous misunderstanding, already, of the messages behind the Bible and it's meanings. How do you, an Atheist, know for certain what the Christian Hell is? Understanding what the Christian Hell is requires an understanding of Christianity, which you have shown you do not possess.

Just because you call yourself a christian, does not mean you get to make up stuff about what their rulebook says. Hell happens after physical death and god-judgement if that judgement is not in your favour. It is eternal and it is all agony.

The Bible is all about spirituality, and the lessons one learns throughout life that can be applied to spiritual health, spiritual wellness, and spiritual discipline. To be in Hell, one does not have to physically die; spiritual death can have the same effect, as well. This is what I have experienced. Spiritual death. It is not pleasant.

Oh you poor sufferer. The bible says nothing about meaning spiritual 'death' whatever the fuck that is, I mean what has 'died' exactly? But anyways, your personal spiritual self growth traumas aside, the bible teaches that the after death&judgement hell is real, not just symbolic of your earthtime sadnesses.

You don't get to call real life bad times, which everyone gets no matter what one's belief in dities, the christian hell. Hell in the xtian bible happens after death,

After spiritual death.

Where does it say that?

and whether you are sent there is determined by what God thinks of what you did and thought while you were alive on Earth. No making shit up, or you are not really a christian.

God is a part of all things. Even you, and even me. That's what one's soul is, the part of the human being most connected to God. This is a Christian belief. This is why, when you do bad things, you feel bad; your soul, the part of you that is most in-tune with God, is punishing you because it knows better than you do what is right and wrong. You have the final say in what your own punishment is, because your soul is in tune with God and knows what is bad or good. When you do good, your soul makes you feel good; when you do bad, your soul makes you feel bad.

You are still making shit up. When you feel bad about something, you will simply feel bad until the situation is either fixed or far enough in the past that it no longer affects you. Has nothing to do with gods and souls and being punished for not knowing right and wrong. Thinking it's about gods and souls means that you will not get around to figuring out the real reasons you are feeling bad.

[tackattack]

The walls of text are getting moreand more difficult. But since you prefer threads to PM I'll reitterate here.

---

My God doesn't expet me to deny my feelings, in fact my true feeling (when selfless) are required to follow God accurately.

If that were the case, there would be no expectations at all of positive god-thoughts. Nothing about praise, thanks, worship, even plain old belief. Such a god would not be so petty as to need the attention and glory. Are you sure you are a christian? A deist or a theist, yes, but a christian? Maybe an offshoot or merging of christianity with your own inner personal concept of god, but it's pretty clear that the christian god expects you to think about how wonderful he is.

---

I don't think God need thanks praise or worship. The Bible, IMO is written by men for men about God and inspired by their devotion to God. It gives us instructions on how to better serve God's plan while here on Earth. I think that praise and thankfullness is a natural human response from one receiving (us). It's not a requirement from the one giving, although in human terms it is usually expeted, I don't feel God epects it. You're attributing a human dynamic to God and I don't htink it fits.

---

I do agree with his my own morals. They don't preclude me from my religion and are in line with Christianity. I don't love and worship dictators, or nut jobs.

Biblegod is quite a dictator. No other religions allowed or you're killed, gays are killed, free women are killed, slavery is promoted and endorsed, etc. Even the part 2, new testament, says to keep these old laws in place. Many christians think part 2 changes things for a nicer kinder gentler set of laws, but it doesn't. Even if it did, it wouldn't change the fact that people of previous times had to suffer because of them.

---

The Abrahamic God is depicted in the OT as a dictator. I won't counter each of your points. I'm aware that the NT holds up the abrahamic laws. It also teaches us to temper them with intuition and reason. It teaches us also to not be so closed-minded (and hearted) as to assume we are the autority on what box God fitsin, because he doesn't. I also ascent that people have suffered in the past for their beliefs.

---

I think what you see as a threat, is not focused on as much worldwide, from the religions, as you've probably experienced in you local area (wherever that may be).

Are you talking about the claimed threat of hell that religions use on their believers, or the way religions have threatened/affected my personal life?

---

No I was talking about hellfire and brimstone churches you've experienced. To claim that all of Christianity uses the threat of hell to sway believers is fallicious and not reperesentative of the current movement, IMO.

---

-What is worship? obeying not the "teaching for doctrines the commandments of men" (Matt. 15: 9). It can be public or private, acknowledging that someone or something else is greater, and worthy of striving towards.

There should be absolutely no requirement for it at all, not even an expectation or hope of such a thing. Why would a god need any acknowledgement of his deeds from the creatures he made? This does not make sense. At all.

---

addressed above

---

-What is acceptance into the heart? to fully trust and pledge allgiance to in your heart (the original Greek pisteuo is a much better word)

This should be a completely voluntary, spontaneous emotion for a person to feel about another, never ever demanded. That is fucking sick to demand things like that. Everyone hopes for others to like them, but to demand it is creepy or something. Ick. I'm picturing God wearing one of those 'something's wrong with that guy' hats, as found in this funny

---

addressed above. I believe it is voulentary and a reactionary thing. on our part.

---

-What is love? You're going to have to be more specific on this one if you want an answer

I dislike any serious use of the word 'love', as it has too many meanings and often comes attached to tons of baggage. That goes for the use of the word in both the ordinary and romantic senses, but unless God gets you horny, I'll assume we are talking about the ordinary use of the word. However, regardless of the different definitions, they all refer to some form of liking, or being fond of, the one who is loved.

---

I typically hate some fundie sites.. this on'es not bad and gives you a good idea on my feelings about God's love link

---

-What is belief? Mental acceptance of or conviction in the truth or actuality of something (common connotation implies with proof)

There is no reason at all for a god to need us to believe in his existence. If there were some reason that this were important, he would have simply made us already believing instinctually from birth, without fail.

---

agreed

---

A God is not all loving in the sense you're using it. B. If God has a choice between torture and mercy.. it would probably depend on the individuals choices not God's whim

Nonsense, no one would choose torture over mercy. That's ridiculous. Are you saying that hell is real, but only has a few really severe masochists in it? Also, probably means you are not really sure, which tells me you are scared of hell, as you must be if your authority figure is going to decide it for you.

---

?? I thought I was pretty clear. People choose different forms of self abuse daily. Anything from killing your body slowly with drugs, piercing oneself, staying in mentally or physically abusive relationships... it happens all of the time. No I'm not saying hell is real. I believe, right now, there is no hell. If it comes after the judgement day, it'll be whatever would be personally hell to each of us, seperate from God's love to save us from the torture. I'm not scared of hell, nor do I look forward to heaven, I'll have eternity for that. I'm living now, and the now is what matters to me today.

---

-Why would your god even need his emotions pandered to in such an immature way?
A. God doesn't need B. "pandering" would be a choice from reverence by the prostrate, not out of requirement.

Then there would be no requirement or even expectation of all the positive thought laws. God would simply be maybe a bit happy if people did this now and then, the same way we all are when someone else does or thinks something nice towards us.

---

yes.. as above

---

The Bible isn't perfect, but it is inspired you must be thinking of the Qu'ran being a perfect holy book. I will conceed that a majority of Christians feel it is a perfect reflection of God's truth. A literal and fundamentalist approach I believe would be in the minority of the religio of Christianity as a whole, but I have no numbers for that. I personally tend to think of it as man's vain attempt to figure out God, after all, God didn't request we make the thing.

Then you shouldn't give the claims in it any more credibility or consideration than the thousands of other philosophy/religion books written by humans. To call yourself a christian means that you specifically follow the bible, which is the sole result of all the writings made-for/collected about the Jesus Christ being a god myth.

---

It's not about credibility or consideration. It's about what tools we use to strengthen our spiritual selves. As a Christian I use the Bible. If the Bible never existed (including the other abrahamic documents) I would probably use some form of religious naturalism.But it would still be a tool to hone what I feel intuitively is true.

---

-do you think highly of his morals? Yes, he would be a moral "north pole" as it were.

Yikes, maybe you should read the bible before you agree so quickly. Otherwise I will be scared to be around you. Your god would have me killed many times over by now, as well as being sentenced multiply to eternal torture, for many nonharmful 'crimes'.

---

I've read it several times actually, along with several versions, and various other belief's holy books. I just see it differently than you.

---

-Do you worship him due to being truly infatuated and in love with him, or because you are ordered to? between those two choices I'd choose a although we probably have different meanings for the word love

The christian god doesn't let you keep that choice. You are ordered to love him. I have no problem with people choosing to love whoever they want, it's when it is ordered or expected that I have a problem with it.

---

If you could show me that I'd be appreciative. If not .. see above

---

-why is it given divine status among xtians? I don't know. I only give it slightly more status than a math professor gives his calculator.

Then you are taking it as the truth, or as close as one can get short of manufacturing/typo errors in the factories that make calculators and print bibles. Why do you think those humans who wrote it have any more knowledge of the true nature of your god than you do? How do they know anything for sure about it more than what you yourself feel inside you regarding the possibility and personality of a god?

---

I take it as some different people's erspecives on what they see as truth, and their observations of some events that happened with their own interpretations. I do not think (in fact I believe they had less) those who wrote the bible at the time had more knowledge than I of God, aside from a few exceptions.

---

-why do you believe the claims of magic inside? I don't believe in magic as you're using it now. Most, if not all, miracles have been/will be proven by scientific means to be naural aside from possibly resurrection. Theese natural signs were a more primitive man's signs that God was working in their lives. I still see God's hand in every drop of rain and bolt of lightning, every flower and face.

Then that's not a god, that's nature or the reality around you. As for the resurrection, there is a theory I read about the possibility of a planned hoax at the time to make it look like the predicted messiah had happened. The theory has it that the vinegar he was given while on the cross might have contained mandrake/cannabis and whatever to cause the same type of coma-like states that the fakirs in India go into. This would have resulted in him appearing dead and taken down before he had been up there long enough to actually die, etc. Like the shroud of turin, but back then the gullible were in larger numbers. That is of course, if any resurrection-like event even happened, since there are no writings that were actually made at the time about it.

---

I've heard that theory as well and it's quite possible. I don't follow Jesus for his miracles, but for his understanding and closeness with God. No that's not what I meant about the nature thing. I see God's handiwork in every thought, deed, and observance around me. It's not the perfection of the machine that proves the creator, it's the imperfectons that reveal the necessity for God.

---

If you could quote a verse where it says if you question the Bible you will burn forever in hell it would be most helpfull.

I don't know about questioning the bible itself, but there are tons of think-nice-thoughts-about-me commands throughout the book.

---

which was written by men for men's gain.

---

Perhaps you could explain to me your views on "About a cruel and nonsensical reward/punishment system." because I'm not seeing your perspective at all on that one.

Even for a murderer, eternal punishment is too much and serves no purpose anyways. Why would a creator god want to punish his own creations? If they were doing something he didn't like, he could wiggle his nose and change it instantly. Why punish? Does he need revenge on himself, being that it's his own creation and he is everything etc? Oh yeah, the bible says he is vengeful, what the fuck? Is that a perfect emotion one should expect from a god?

---

Why would he punish? You're seeing it differently then me. I don't see it as punishing those that don't follow. Let me use an example. You're working the door for a club. Then the owner says, a terrible storms coming let anyone in who wants to come in. Some people tried to get in and were asked to form an orderly line and wipe their feet. Some people refused to to that, and stayed outside. Some didn't care about getting in the club at all. The fact that the tornado kills every1 outside the club. The owner of course wants to save everyone, but not everyone wants to be saved. I hope the analogy better represents my position.

---

-If your god was going to end up forgiving everyone because he's not really such a mean guy as to torture people forever, why would there even be the hell you believe exists?
Once again, he doesn't forgive everyone. I can't see, without major long term social evolution , the possiblity that every human will completely agree on an idea as complex as God. Hell exists, according to reveleations, as a place after the judgement day for the unqualified to go.

If someone applied for a job at my pretend company Heaven, and they weren't qualified, I wouldn't invite them into Heaven, but I wouldn't punish them either. Why doesn't your god simply have the unqualified die unpunished. There is no need for a hell, other than to scare you believers into following the doctrines of the ruling church and contributing your money to its support.

---

And if your job was the only job in town, they'd be willfully choosing not to work at all. Hell would be not having a job i your scenario. I disagre with the analogy because of the qualifications portion.

---

-Why wouldn't God have given them perfected rules then? Why give them defective ones?
God did Give us "perfect rules" which were then smashed out of frustration and anger, and we had to then generalize. We got that wrong, then Jesus came to give us the inside scoop. It's still our choice to follow those rules or not.
I agree rules are a restriction of freedom. Would you prefer no rules? Nature seems to prefer rules.

Nature has no intent or deservedness to its rules. Gravity doesn't care if your thoughts are approved or not, you will be affected by it either way. The rules humans make can be good ones or bad ones. The ones based on religions are often bad as they are frequently unjust, and they refuse to adjust or update thinking they are already perfect. And your god-rules were never perfect by the way. They human made rules of modern secular societies are far more just and good than biblegod's rules ever were.

---

God does have intent. His intent as our creator, is to see us evolve to a point where we chose right over wrong consistently (As would any father for his children). I don't think God wants his creations to destroy each other in wars, etc. unwavering + human rules = unjust typically, I agree. That was the whole purpose behind Jesus' visit and reinterpretation of those rules. I will just respectfully disagree with you that man's rules are more just than God's. A topic for another time I guess.

---

" the one they think their god had written through divine magical inspiration for them." Someone's delusion in believing God writes things down for us is none of my concern.

But it is, since you call yourself a christian. Almost all christian doctine and belief is based on that book.

---

Yes but I was talking about the authorof the book not the book used. Maybe 1 in 70 Christians I've spoken with would say that the Bible was written by God.

---

-So, you are saying that a person who focuses on their own survival and happiness and the real world around them instead of placating and reassuring an imaginary supermonster through telepathy that he is so wonderful, is deserving of eternal torture?????? No, I'm saying a wholly self-centered person, who's only happiness resides in rejecting all for ignorance, greed, or self-deciet is not wothy of getting an eternal "golden ticket" and gets to fend for themselves wherever they are.

Even someone with a really really shitty personality is not worthy of eternal torture. Hell is not simply fending for oneself where ever one happens to be. It's said to be a place you are sent to against your will for doing nothing wrong, and where you are not allowed to even die and stop the pain, ever. Think about this. Please don't gloss it over or downplay it.

---

I don't gloss over anything intentionally. I always try to address every question. Hell is sent toa place when yoou've commited the ultimate wrong, denying the truth of God and his will. You may view that as nothing, but let me ask you this. If you knew for certain that God existed, would you still live you're life your way?

---

-"It's only sad when someone blindly accepts everything as being second-guess-worthy just because they want to trust the source, without thinking as to whether they agree or not. Otherwise, feedback is great and certainly is a big part of personal change and development." I would also say it's sad when somone ony uses themselves as a source, always trusts in it and has no need to disagree with tihemselves. Luckily I think we both operate somewhere in the middle.

No, I don't think you trust yourself enough, even to a middle ground, or you wouldn't be accepting christianity. Also, I think of myself as trusting myself to a higher than middleground degree. This is because all my experiences and perceptions and thoughts are in me. This gives me a high level of comfort and trust in that what is proven sufficiently to me, can be accepted by me with a very high level of trust. In dealing with other people telling me they believe something to be true, that trust is not there until they prove the info in such a manner that I believe it too.

---

Firstly I don't trust in oneselves has any bearing on my acceptance of Christianity. Secondly, I trust myself and my judements more than most people I know. I have a rational, logical and structured approach to every endeavor. I constantly validate the truth of things not considered axiaoms of life, not for doubt, but verification.I have no problems being myself in any crowd (at all times) and distain two-facedness.

---

I don't sin is a creation for him to creat. It's the absense of God, therefore unless you can go grab a darkness-flashlight I think you're not getting it. God did create evil. Hell is for eternity, but that's after Hades and the judgement. Growth is for the living. I don't think testing me changes my opinion of whether he's "nice" or not. It's called evaluation of worth, checking of standards, looking after the development. Schools tests our kids.. does that make them less nice?

Schools don't (or shouldn't!) punish the ones who don't learn the required stuff. Sure they are not rewarded with the higher paying jobs later due to not having the skills, but they are not tortured forever, not even for a few hours. And how can there be an absense of god? Isn't he everywhere, in everything, etc? No getting away with saying your god didn't create evil. If he created everything, then he created his own alleged enemy too, meaning evil, satan, etc.

---

I don't try and get away with anything. You sure do have a lot of presuppositions and biases towards me. Maybe you should drop those in our next talk so we can just talk. It comes off as quite spiteful in some of your posts. Anyways absense of God. Hell, according to the bible, will be created for Satan and his minions. It's like God built a house for his nephew. He can visit, but he'd probably rather stay home.

---

-"If you want to play the 'that part's not really real' game, then would you admit that maybe your god is not real either? Nothing in the bible saying that you are to see him as a real being, after all...."
I fully admit the possibility that God is not real I fully grant that I have no proofs of God's existence. I don't relaly like games myself.

Good, then if that is the case, I would like to consider you agnostic, or maybe simply a hopeful deist? My respect level goes up towards believers who will not blindly accept what other humans tell them their personal god should be. That also means they will be guided by their own true inner morals (even if they think a god is telling them) instead of what an organized religion is telling them.

---

You may consider me whatever makes you happiest. I'll tell you that I myself consider myself a Non-denominational Christian with the Church of God Anderson, Indiana movement. The things I've discussed with you are the same subjects I teach to my kids (both in sunday school and my own kids). My congreration wouldn't allow me to teach it if they didn't agree with it as well.

---

Same to you. You're not as annoying as some believers I argue with! I fully reserve the right though, to get mega annoyed with your views at any time in future at my discretion, blah blah [/end disclaimer].

---

Although I rarely if ever use humor in the more serious sections of the forums, and I appreciate your compliment. Feel free to get annoyed and disagree all you want, dissonance is the italian seasoning of life, as long as we can keep it civil that it. Have a great day

[Violet]

I think I've just witnessed the largest posts on the forum... hock:

[Watson]

Yeah, my responses are going to end up long as hell, too...I think I'm going to have to go through and add the hide tag onto them once I respond(later today). XD

[Watson]

---

[hide]

You have no way of knowing that God is not a metaphor (like for evil and abuse of authority) and so therefore the teachings are metaphors too, like maybe for evil and cruel laws we should watch out for. How about that interpretation? You can't prove otherwise. God is a metaphor for evil that will trick you and tell you it's good.

---

How many times do I have to say this; I have experienced God, I have experienced His affects on this world, and I understand His nature. Applying that to the Bible, which was writte by men who believed in God, I can see what they were getting at because I've seen the lessons and the workings myself, in real life.

---

If the bible is a fixed reference to you, then you ARE following the bible, and therefore the bible's version of what god is.

---

Ga!- fu!- Sonuva!- *eyeball twitches*

I am following God. The Bible is a fixed reference because, to me, it does the best job of any holy book of describing in words the experiences I have had and the lessos I have observed about life. It does not get it completely, 100% correct, but it comes pretty damn close.

Lots of deaths and misery have resulted from people doing just that with your biblebook.

And lots of good, too. Your point?

---

I'm glad you have no 'need' for it, in the food and water sense, because I think the book should be mega-mocked, stuck on a pole and displayed in the town square, and certainly not used for guidance. Too much very real harm has been done because of it, and for much too long.

---

Good for you, I'm glad you could share your misinformed feelings on the Bible. None of this had any relevance. Any of it.

---

Yeah, yeah, that's nice, so, um, about those lessons, what lessons specifically has the bible taught you?

Oh FFS! Most of the lessons I've learned and conclusions I have come to have been through real life experience. The Bible has simply reinforced my confidence in those lessons by being a fixed reference which has also observed the same things.

---

---

You are claiming to be a christian, so it's the book you hold above the others I'm talking about.

I don't hold it 'above' any other books; I simply find it more far-reaching than the other books. I find it closer to the truth than any other holy book. So I choose to use it as my fixed reference.

---

---

It doesn't matter that some of the other religions and philosophies out there share some of the ideas/lessons with you.

Actually, it does. It is (subjective) evidence towards the theory that all holy books are an attempt at recording the same life lessons, and that these lessons can be observed in real life to some benefit and understanding.

---

---

And I am hoping that those lessons you learned outweigh the horrible crimes committed in the name of that same book which has helped you so much, but even if they don't, I am curious as to what they are, preferable in the order of their importance to you.

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Love yourself.
Love others.
Love your life.
Love God(which essentially includes all of the above)

Those are off the top of my head.

---

But you are if all the lessons are individual and not clearly the same for everyone.

No, I am saying that everyone experiences them differently, but that they are still the same lessons..

---

Then in that case, I expect it to do more help than harm, at the very least a neutral no-effect. The writings of the abrahamic god followers (of which the xtian bible is a part of) have caused serious fucking damage, and are continuing to do so, bigtime!

So have the writings of communists, so have the writings of republicans, so have the writings of democrats, so have the writings of socialists, so have the writings of just about every fucking person ever who's been widely known...your point?

---

---

I'll consider accepting your claim if you first prove to me that we can observe your god's effects on humans, which of course must also show that the god you claim as the causative element actually exists and is causing that effect.

Prove to me that it is actually gravity that makes that apple fall, and we'll talk.

I can make predictions given certain scenarios, such as how people will be impacted by denying or accepting God, what they will do if they act a certain way, in relation to God, but I am not just going to pull stories out of my ass; I don't have the time for that right now. I suggest you re-read the Bible, because- hey, that's what the Bible is for!

---

The bible does NOT say the god parts and effect descriptions are true, but the rest is not.

It is fucking implied, that's the whole point of the Bible; to understand it, not just know it. You can't understand what you haven't experienced. It's like saying you're an expert on marijuana without ever having been high.

---

And science books don't tend to use made up stories, unless of course it is prefaced by something like, 'the following fictional example is used here to display how such a resulting reaction of object weight on various shelf materials in relation to gravity's effects, and how they might take place in a household environment', etc.

I have never, ever seen a disclaimed such as that on any scientific book ever. I could believe that it might be on some, but it is not necessary for people to understand that the example they are reading is fictional; it's common sense. Ever read a math text book? There are plenty of fictional stories supplied there to demonstrate math problems.

---

Ok, fine, but I still can't take your word on it, and I still want to see where the bible makes that clear to me, not you. If it's a holy book, it should at least be clear about what it's messages and facts/metaphors are.

Againl it is fucking implied. That's the whole goddamn point. Ugh!

---

I'll quote fr0do from a completely different topic here:

God is one. (Deut. 6:4, Romans 3:30, Galatians 3:20, James 2:19)
God is holy. (Psalm 99:9)
God is spirit. (John 4:24)
God is light. (1 John 1:5)
God is love. (1 John 4:8, 1 John 4:16)

Hmm, all this time I thought one was just another number, love an emotion, and light a physics thing that I don't quite understand due to never having studied it much.

One as in whole. Love is not just an emotion. Light as in goodness and unphysical-ness.

---

---

Yikes, I think for the sake of debating about religions, I will stick to the part where God is a superbeing who created everything,

is all loving

, and omnipotent, and wants humans to do certain unecessary things such as think thoughts of praise about him, and wants them to do other things too, like help him fight the evil devil he created.

Bolded what is so ironic, it blows my mind, for you.

---

---

I'm not a scientist, but a science book would more likely have something like: Here at the Research Lab where the author of this report works, we observed that 100% of the apples in our samples (100,000 subject apple trees with an average of 150 apples each) fell at the moment they were no longer supported by the tree branch. This was observed by a team of 10 researchers, recorded on video as well as stop-motion still photography, and the floor onto which the apples fell had a scale which recorded the weight difference when they landed. Air friction slowdown was seen and recorded, in relation to the apples' individual sizes and shapes aligning completely without deviation to the mathematics of such friction, blah blah.

No they wouldn't. Why? Because that sounds ridiculously fucking confusing and assumes that the reader does not trust the book in the first place, needing a shitload of back-up people to say "Oh, yeah, it happened". Readers don't need that if they're being presented something which is supposedly true.

---

---

You've already admitted that you put it through your personal interpretation of what you think are metaphors and what they represent. I will stick to the pre-additional-filter stuff that the actual book itself says.

No, I've put it through my own observations of the real world, examined it under that scrutiny, and found it to be rather consistant with the observations I have made prior.

---

---

Even if you don't, the lessons to be evil to others is still there, the vengence, the justified persecutions, the slaughter, the slavery, etc.

Because the book was written during a time when those things were acceptable and mandatory in some ways. It does not mean that they were the true teachings of God; it just means man's own faults permeate everything he creates; even the Bible.

---

---

Can you think of ANY context where killing disobedient children should be the rule? WTF?????

I am not saying that it should be the rule. I am saying that at the time, it was. You'll have to pin the blame on the men who wrote the Bible for thinking as such, not on God for decreeing as such; God would not do so.

---

I would if that book were claiming to be the path to happiness, goodness, and truth and change for the better, etc.

Not if that book was written by men, you wouldn't.

---

Then why do you worship a monotheistic god, instead of the original worship of many gods, or even the worship of things other than gods, like ancestors, animals spirits, etc.?

Because I have observed that what was once thought of as many Gods is simply a dividing of one God. Similarly, I do have a certain amount of reverence for my ancestors, animal spirits, and the like. I just acknowledge the parts of them which are 'Godly' to a extent.

---

---

For one thing, it shows that maybe the lizard tale wasn't about commies at all, but maybe about something completely different, and your head made it fit to what you wanted it to be. To you, the Adam and Eve story probably represents the battle against sin, but maybe it just represents one religion taking power from another religion and telling their followers that the old religion's gods were evil through a story. Just one of many many interpretations, and of course that means many or most will not have the commies as being the metaphor's meaning in their lizard story.

Did you read the story about Fahenheit 451 ad Ray Bradbury I posted? I'm thinking you didn't understand it.

It is all about the intent of the author. The Bible's authors intended to write down their observations about God and His nature/ how He works. For them to do that, they had to have observed God in real life, just as I have. Therefore, I can understand what their intent was because I have seen the very same things they are clearly trying to record.

---

---

Then, you are claiming that some guy named Jesus Christ was really God.

I am claiming that every one is God; at least, a part of them is. Therefore, Jesus Christ, who was as much a part of God as you or I and was the prodigal son of God, was more in-tune with God than you or I.

---

In other words, here you are taking the bible literally.

No, I am not; I do not know if Jesus Christ ever existed or not. I believe in His existence as a concept; that is, it is entirely probable for God to act in the way He does in the story of Jesus Christ.

---

The prediction of a coming messiah happened long before the xtian branching off 2000 years ago. The church found it politically and financially profitable to claim that it was really happening and that they are the right religion to follow. The details on whether a faked death/resurrection occurred, or whether it was completely just written fictually about a hundred years later are sketchy, but either way, it was very beneficial to the church's agenda of being the next theocracy. It worked too!

This is also the exact same reason why some messages in the Bible are not accurate to God's lessons and message; certain parts of the Bible were written merely for political domiation and control.

---

Ok, so.... where is that evidence?

As I have stated many times, it is subjective evidence; empirical, scientific evidence is not the only kind of evidence possible.

What was shown to be accurate and how.

The effects of God and denying/accepting Him have proven to affect human nature in my observances of such things time and time again.

Why would you need faith in observing anything? Doesn't that skew the results in favour of your predetermined faithbelief?

No, it does not. Trust is an off-shoot of faith; I trust the world around me is how it appears, therefore I have faith it is how it appears. I am then ready to make unbiased observations about the world around me, as it appears.

All that tells me is that you experienced love, not that an invisible universe creator exists.

I am telling you that love is God, and that love is simply another word for the creator of the universe.

Also, God is not invisible. He is all around us, in forms we must look for and recognize as such.

Nonsense, I bask and whatever in life without any need for a god or gods, so why would a person need an invisible friend to enjoy life to their best?

Again, God is not invisible; God is all of life. Therefore, to truly apprecite and understand life, one must accept God. This is a simple concept. It is a Christian belief. I don't expect you to believe it, I just expect you to try and understand it.

You're going to have to. I look and look, but can't find anything but shit in that book.

Because you aren't looking at it correctly.

---

Even the heroes who are portrayed as being really good and admirable (and the only ones considered worthy of saving by god) are awful people, like the sexual exploiters of their own children, Lot and Noah. Since you probably haven't actually read the bible, let me fill you in. To protect some visiting strangers to town, Lot offered up his virgin daughters to be raped by the male townfolk, and Noah got drunk and had sex with his own son.

---

I haven't read the Bible, actually. I don't care to know the details to the stories, because those aren't the parts which are important to the message; the funny thing is, they are the only parts that you focus on.

Explain this common sense please. I'm not seeing it.

It's called understanding. When you read a book, you don't simply read the book to know what happens within it; you read it to understand what happens within it. Knowledge and understanding are not synonymous nor co-dependent.

---

Shit. Jesus Christ Himself is depicted within the Bible as critical of the church!

He was depicted as being slightly critical of the church that the new christ version was trying to take over from. The newer one kept most of the older one's dogmas to use as their own.
He cited the OT for His purposes, so that He could help those He was preaching to understand them better. And no, He was not simply slightly critical; the whole reason He was crucified was for being critical of the church's doctrines and teachings.

---

---

I like the sentiment behind Hindu reluctance to hurt animals, but it does not make me a believer in their goddesses and gods. I would not call myself a Hindu.

What do you mean by, you 'like' some of their sentiments? Go into more detail, please, break it down and super-simplify what you are saying.

---

Sounds good, I agree. Let's dump the bible and move on. It's 2010 people.

Want to write a new Bible? Okay, let's go for it! ...Oh, wait. You're an atheist, so...it would be kind of counter-productive to involve you.

---

Just because you call yourself a christian, does not mean you get to make up stuff about what their rulebook says.

I'm not making up anything. I'm going off of what I'm fairly certain the believers in God who wrote the Bible intended; they intended similar things to what I would intend if I had written the Bible.

Hell happens after physical death and god-judgement if that judgement is not in your favour. It is eternal and it is all agony.

You still don't get it, do you? Inter-link all of my beliefs, SN, you cannot take them as individual bits and pieces. They are all parts of the same whole. What I have said thus far is this;
God is a part of you.
God is spiritual in His entirety.
God is your spirit.
'God-judgement', as you label it, is your spirit judging you.
Hell is something which exists here on Earth, as a state of mind, and after-death as an eternal seperation from God/ your own spirit.

---

---

Oh you poor sufferer. The bible says nothing about meaning spiritual 'death' whatever the fuck that is, I mean what has 'died' exactly?

Your...spirit...that is what is implied in the term 'spiritual death.' Fuck, you must really hate reading, don't you? To understand that the Bible means spiritual death, you have to read it as a whole, not as individual parts.

But anyways, your personal spiritual self growth traumas aside, the bible teaches that the after death&judgement hell is real, not just symbolic of your earthtime sadnesses.

Yes, it is real, in the spiritual realm on which God exists.

---

Where does it say that?

Implication. Intent. Rinse. Repeat.

I don't know how many times I have to tell you this.

---

You are still making shit up. When you feel bad about something, you will simply feel bad until the situation is either fixed or far enough in the past that it no longer affects you.

You don't always stop being affected and feeling bad about a situation after it is fixed or long gone. Tell that to veterans of Vietnam, who still feel the effects of their time in war. If you can forgive yourself for what occured, or accept that what occured was not your fault/ respnsibility, then you are more feely able to move on. The Christian belief, funny enough, is that God/ your spirit/ the Holy Spirit is the part of you which is utilized in the process of forgiveness.

Has nothing to do with gods and souls and being punished for not knowing right and wrong. Thinking it's about gods and souls means that you will not get around to figuring out the real reasons you are feeling bad.

This here is just yet another rant with no relevance which gives me nothing to respond to.

---

[/hide]

I want to put this whole thing into a hide tag, but I can't seem to. Because, holy shit is it long. This is an interesting discussion, though, I'm enjoying myself!