Sad thought about Jesus.

[popsthebuilder]

Which Greek alphabet is that word written in?

So, let me see if I have this right: We're on an atheist forum, where the vast majority of the members supposedly do not believe that god, heaven, or hell exists.  Most of us are in agreement that the Holy Babble is a deeply flawed piece of human literature.

A quote was made from 11 English translations regarding the meaning of "eternal" or "everlasting".
So, somebody who apparently is not a Greek scholar looks up a Greek word - gets conflicting translations - and tries to use it to prove his original point . . . by strongly implying that all of the English translations are, well, to be generous, let's say "unclear".  Lek's original point seems to be that Hell is not ETERNAL torture. It's a finite period of time.  

Drippy Doodle gets into the mix somehow, but I have him on ignore.

Is no-one going to point out that 1) the entire argument is spurious and moot to people who don't believe in the existence of god or hell; 2) Lek's pleading to the mis-translation of this passage can be applied to the entire book with ease, and 3) attempting to re-define hell and its duration is acknowledging that the original concept is flawed, illogical, unbelievably cruel and unfair?

Hell, nor Heaven, nor Earth are eternal. It is written numerous times in many scriptures.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

[popsthebuilder]

You've distorted the whole situation to the max, but you're free to believe what you want.

No I have not distorted a thing. Your problem is that you swallowed the book without skepticism so of course you don't read it objectively. Just like if you point out the nasty parts of the Koran a Muslim will jump all over you as well.

Now, instead of saying my short summery is a distortion because you don't like my book review, try understanding it like you would if you saw a bad movie or read a bad work of fiction.

From the start, as the book goes, the head character is an unmovable figure who does everything by himself and doesn't ask anyone for consent, he simply does it. In reality outside that book, the west has gotten away from the concept of kings and lords which are dictators. The royalty that still exists in Europe and Japan have been neutered to basically diplomat status. 

Take your deity googles off. Back in all of antiquity even in polytheism the ruling class where at best puppet governments even in Rome. Some allowed more self governance but ultimately even a Cesar could override what the senate did. Even they moved up through family rule, by the death of those prior or the murder by a competitive family member. 

The Egyptians also mistook their success as coming from the divine. So if you go back and read that bible without your beer goggles on, you do see the words like Kingdom and Lord and master. Because back then humans lived in very feudal times and there was no modern class pluralistic rule. Back then in most societies you had family rule, government class, which was upper class, and military class, the rest of society basically were the servants for the other three. 

Now again, the head character is not the nice guy you interpret him as. I get that you like him and want to view him like that, but that character was mistaken as real, but he was not written like that for modern society, he is a reflection of the false perceptions of the people back then and their own desires. Just like you'd rightfully accept the Native American's spirit gods are a reflection of what their social norms were back when people made them up.

There is no way to paint the god of Abraham as objectively pluralistic. Being kind some of the time or to some people, and even trying to get out of the concept of hell through cherry picking still puts him in absolute power. In real life, our elected officials don't have absolute power. The god of the bible is not elected like a PM or President in the west. Now instead of seeing that as an insult go back and read the bible word for word and don't skip anything and don't try to justify clinging to that book, just simply read it like you had never picked it up before.


He is a dictator, there is simply no polite way to put it. That is what you call an immovable position.

Your view is quite biased.

All scripture describes a way of being that is beneficial to All existence for its sake, not the one creator God's. Following the teachings and direction of God is not missing anything's ass. It is a means to attain a blissful, productive, peaceful, meaningful state wholly as a whole in reciprocation to the One creative force that is responsible for all other good and creation known and unknown to man and his own flaw through choice.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

[God of Mr. Hanky]

Well fuck jesus then.

People often times don't understand that the word "believe" in the scripture means to adhere to whole heartedly in All you do without waver.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

Faith in selfless Unity Action for Good is what I can get on board with.

"Unity" is dangerously problematic because it puts a halt on the critical thought processes which are required for anyone to really see the difference between good and evil. If I were to start thinking like everyone else again, as I did (or tried to) when I was a Christian, then I would become blind to abuses within my organization for the presumption that Christian organizational leaders are appointed by my god. I would see only the friendly smile, and hear only comforting words, and it would take something particularly outrageous and vile to wake me up to the notion that said leader isn't really what he's supposed to be.

Scripture <> Good unless you are already a Christian,

and

Good <> God.

Therefore, if you want to sell your bible or your god outside of your echo chamber (sorry, but you act exactly like one who just crawled out of one), then you have a lot of proving to do. Protip: Don't waste time on bible quotes, that old pile means nothing here. Also, don't argue, because argument is not evidence, and evidence is both culture-proof and reason-proof (just in case you don't understand the word "empirical").

[popsthebuilder]

People often times don't understand that the word "believe" in the scripture means to adhere to whole heartedly in All you do without waver.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

Faith in selfless Unity Action for Good is what I can get on board with.

"Unity" is dangerously problematic because it puts a halt on the critical thought processes which are required for anyone to really see the difference between good and evil. If I were to start thinking like everyone else again, as I did (or tried to) when I was a Christian, then I would become blind to abuses within my organization for the presumption that Christian organizational leaders are appointed by my god. I would see only the friendly smile, and hear only comforting words, and it would take something particularly outrageous and vile to wake me up to the notion that said leader isn't really what he's supposed to be.

Scripture <> Good unless you are already a Christian,

and

Good <> God.

Therefore, if you want to sell your bible or your god outside of your echo chamber (sorry, but you act exactly like one who just crawled out of one), then you have a lot of proving to do. Protip: Don't waste time on bible quotes, that old pile means nothing here. Also, don't argue, because argument is not evidence, and evidence is both culture-proof and reason-proof (just in case you don't understand the word "empirical").

Unity in the context I mean is speaking of the potential of whole peaceable unity throughout existence and life for the benefit thereof. It has the potential also to be all inclusive, but only if all were to adhere to the instinctual selfless conscience within themselves imparted by God and made possible to reunite with via the teachings, way, example, and self sacrifice of the one true Christ.

You speak of my God; I speak of One Creator GOD. I'd be delighted to speak of any topic, or specifics you would like. Insults or negativity in any form is counter productive, and a waste of energy.

Peace

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

[God of Mr. Hanky]

Faith in selfless Unity Action for Good is what I can get on board with.

"Unity" is dangerously problematic because it puts a halt on the critical thought processes which are required for anyone to really see the difference between good and evil. If I were to start thinking like everyone else again, as I did (or tried to) when I was a Christian, then I would become blind to abuses within my organization for the presumption that Christian organizational leaders are appointed by my god. I would see only the friendly smile, and hear only comforting words, and it would take something particularly outrageous and vile to wake me up to the notion that said leader isn't really what he's supposed to be.

Scripture <> Good unless you are already a Christian,

and

Good <> God.

Therefore, if you want to sell your bible or your god outside of your echo chamber (sorry, but you act exactly like one who just crawled out of one), then you have a lot of proving to do. Protip: Don't waste time on bible quotes, that old pile means nothing here. Also, don't argue, because argument is not evidence, and evidence is both culture-proof and reason-proof (just in case you don't understand the word "empirical").

Unity in the context I mean is speaking of the potential of whole peaceable unity throughout existence and life for the benefit thereof. It has the potential also to be all inclusive, but only if all were to adhere to the instinctual selfless conscience within themselves imparted by God and made possible to reunite with via the teachings, way, example, and self sacrifice of the one true Christ.

You speak of my God; I speak of One Creator GOD. I'd be delighted to speak of any topic, or specifics you would like. Insults or negativity in any form is counter productive, and a waste of energy.

Peace

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

You have every right to believe what you wish to, just as we choose instead to believe what science and logic explains to us better. But don't forget you are on an atheist forum, where presumptions that your god not only exists, but is also a good one are not shared by most.

On unity, it's specifically by not encouraging the hive mentality of that sort of thinking that we see bad ideas corrected, better ones promoted, and the increase of good in this world.

Regarding good, the only connection between this and faith exists in the minds of the faithful. Any large crowd of normal people understands what basic ideas they share in common regarding how good is defined, and no doctrine from any religious leader is required for these ideas to be put to practice. Most of us don't steal from other, rape or kill other people because The 10 Commandments our social evolution weeded out the majority of those with the temperament for doing such things to others. Which is good that it did, or to be more specific it's good that the entire human species did not evolve to be predatory. Human is not the sort of animal which survives well as solitary and predatory individuals, and most of us can do no better this way when we prey on each other. Therefore it happened that when those with better social traits were born, they and their offspring survived. How else do you think humanity could have persisted for the thousands of years in which it did prior to being handed down those commandments by the non-historical figure Moses? We also have developed through our evolution empathy for each other of a mutual sort, this too makes the typical individual's life longer and richer.

The point I'm trying to make is not only that there is probably no need for faith in helping most people grasp the underlying foundations of good, but that it's best that we apply reason and present evidence (not rhetorical argumentafion) for the cases we make when we argue the finer detail which would improve society. I have observed closely just how effective religious ideas are at helping with that for 50 years, and the sad news in my conclusion is that at best a doctrine for a god (faith requires this, otherwise its object goes undefined) can at best repeat the basic ideas on good which already exist naturally in us. At worst...do I really need to go on? It's the efforts which believers make to protect their doctrines which get in the way of positive social progress.

[popsthebuilder]

I'm sorry, I didn't realize I refuted sound scientific hypothesis by believing in God. I understand completely that my views aren't generally shared by the atheist community or most religious ones for that matter.

Don't kno what you meant by hive mentality. There is an objective morality in all people. It's called our conscience. It is imparted by God, to us. All "ideas" in reference to morality or equality should be tested.

Never said anything about a doctrine from a religious leader. I'm talking about core scriptures of peaceable generally monotheistic religions, not the teachings, of any one person or religion. It's not that without following God one will indeed be a rapist or murderer, but that it teaches of a way of being that is pure and benifitial to all existence. One might see themself as without sin. This is false. Just because you don't kill or rape doesn't mean you don't do things out of greed or hate.

You seem confused. Humans are predatory, they just deceive themselves about it because it isn't nessicarily violent. Who said Faith in the One Creator GOD started with Moses? Not me, I assure you. You speak of empathy and evolution and human nature as if these things weren't all set in motion by God for our sake, not his. Do a little research and you will find a lot of geographical oddities that indicate the worship of a creative force long before written word, and yes, before the time of Moses.

Faith is intrinsic to the good in man from God because of the exponential amount of bad that is readily observable in general. We must be able to believe in the potential direction of man. Conversely, the obvious observable direction of man is that of greed, prejudice, and atrocity. To state otherwise is not realistic. Another point I would like to point out is that there are quite a number of people who understand there is a God but don't grasp the gravity of the situation, or unknowingly actively work against the very direction they think they are working towards. There are others that are good people for the most part but have some hatred towards others due to the beliefs of the two parties.

There is also a potential to unify even these people, and all others paving the way for advancement and prosperity never before witnessed. This can be achived through the selfless conscience on a global level. The implications are without limit. The source is God, the way is the teachings and example and sacrifice of Jesus, the only true Crist.

You mention observing religion. Know that what I speak of isn't really organized religion, or at very least isn't defined by it.

I understand where you're coming from, but I don't think you quite understand my particular point of view.

Perhaps we can speak further.

Peace

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

[The Valkyrie]

Dear non-friend.

There is a common fact your deity shares with all the other deities that humans have invented through history - he's fictional.

[God of Mr. Hanky]

I'm sorry, I didn't realize I refuted sound scientific hypothesis by believing in God. I understand completely that my views aren't generally shared by the atheist community or most religious ones for that matter.Nothing to be sorry about, and don't worry about god on science, the two are realistically unlikely to meet  

It wasn't totally clear to me that you understood our views, thought I was reading the often-bandied and rather dubious idea that your god is required for anything good to happen, be it natural events or the deeds of men and women. 

Don't kno what you meant by hive mentality.

You really didn't? Not when I addressed the word "Unity"? Maybe you had something different in mind, but I'll say the word was frequently bandied around churches which I attended on the need for Xtians to stand together on certain things, and they weren't all on issues which non-Christians necessarily found agreeable.

There is an objective morality in all people. It's called our conscience.

There are common traits which evolved in all people, because we are all the same species. Other species which shared our genus probably had them too, to some degree. Your dog has a conscience too, chances are it really aims to please and feels awful when it fails.  The human conscience is a result of complex empathy. Empathy is a wonderful thing, which is not a necessary component in all sociable animal societies, but it exists out of evolutionary necessity in more complexly sociable animals, including humans and apes.

Oh, guess what else is truly wonderful? The scientific facts which can be learned through empirical evidence!

It is imparted by God, to us.

I'm not being testy about this, it's important to recognize how the above statement is an opinion.

All "ideas" in reference to morality or equality should be tested

Agreed.

Never said anything about a doctrine from a religious leader. I'm talking about core scriptures of peaceable generally monotheistic religions, not the teachings, of any one person or religion.

Still not what an atheist has use for, so why play it here?

It's not that without following God one will indeed be a rapist or murderer, but that it teaches of a way of being that is pure and benifitial to all existence.

Got that, now.

However, the record of success as a good model for human behavior isn't nearly as good as has been claimed by anyone promoting Christianity from that angle. There is "don't steal", and "don't commit murder", both which humans avoid doing without being told when they aren't sociopathic. Love of your own parents is naturally healthy, but if they are impossible to love and committed life-scarring, and legally unforgivable abuses, then you probably should not "honor" them. Adultery is usually, although not always cruel, which is why most humans who aren't dicks despise it, even when some in other cultures define that differently (and I do not respect polygamy). "Fornication", when practiced safely by consenting adults, never harmed anyone. "Thou shalt not covet" - why not? It can be at least as much a motivator for success as the precursor to theft. If this wasn't so in the culture of ancient Jewish goat-herders, then good thing we don't live like them now! This leaves the remainder of the infamous 10, which are all about the god which does not apply in the world outside.

One might see themself as without sin. This is false. Just because you don't kill or rape doesn't mean you don't do things out of greed or hate.

That's another no-no! "Sin" is a religious construct, so if you want a discussion on how atheists and Christians can work together for good (at this point I think that's what you mean by unity), then this should not be part of it.

Only Christians believe that people are inexorably born sinners, and therefore in need of your god's forgiveness. The rest of us recognize that we aren't perfect, but will strive to do our best at leaving this world a better place than it was when we entered it anyway. As an atheist, my perspective on our imperfection is that the evidence points out the necessary imperfection of the more-than-probably accidental processes by which we came to exist. An evolutionary process which began from the bottom, showing no signs whatsoever of the top-down approach which would have to have been if it were designed, just keeps on progressing by accident as our changing genes change our traits, and nature sorts out the best for the niche available.

You seem confused. Humans are predatory, they just deceive themselves about it because it isn't nessicarily violent.

Oh, now that's just really cute! Are you not aware of the fact that humans (complexly sociable, upright-walking, and environment-manipulating non-ape) pre-existed your religion and all notions of your god by two million years? The one remaining human species has been around for at least 75 thousand years. They didn't write that far back, nor did they settle as close together in agricultural cities, but their hunter-gather societies are observed in the fossil record as no less complex than would be expected for people living in primitive conditions.

Pop-quiz: Can people who are all predatory on each other live together for 75,000 years, or even 100 years without triggering their species extinction?

Who said Faith in the One Creator GOD started with Moses? Not me, I assure you.

Didn't say that. But before Moses, your god would have to have conversed more directly with his followers, and this is where the story become much too complicated to be really credible.

You speak of empathy and evolution and human nature as if these things weren't all set in motion by God for our sake, not his. Do a little research and you will find a lot of geographical oddities that indicate the worship of a creative force long before written word, and yes, before the time of Moses

So, that's it - you've come here for no better purpose to troll out "atheists are wrong". This is not the place for that!

Faith is intrinsic to the good in man from God because of the exponential amount of bad that is readily observable in general. We must be able to believe in the potential direction of man. Conversely, the obvious observable direction of man is that of greed, prejudice, and atrocity. To state otherwise is not realistic. Another point I would like to point out is that there are quite a number of people who understand there is a God but don't grasp the gravity of the situation, or unknowingly actively work against the very direction they think they are working towards. There are others that are good people for the most part but have some hatred towards others due to the beliefs of the two parties.

So says the Christian on all of that, and always without merit which anybody who thinks different should be sanely expected to respond to positively. Don't expect that from me, either.

You mention observing religion. Know that what I speak of isn't really organized religion, or at very least isn't defined by it.

So it's the gospel according to you then? Well glad you cleared that up, this makes it so much better! Be warned, as I have personally observed this situation, it doesn't end well. It's where the line between religious zealotry and insanity become very, very fuzzy!

I understand where you're coming from, but I don't think you quite understand my particular point of view.

Oh, I do because I've been there.

Peace, out.

---

[Cyberman]

One might see themself as without sin. This is false. Just because you don't kill or rape doesn't mean you don't do things out of greed or hate.

You seem confused. Humans are predatory, they just deceive themselves about it because it isn't nessicarily violent.

Then "sin" is acting according to human nature, the way you would claim your god created us. Human nature, criminalised.

[orangebox21]

Crist is a way of being that is attainable through adherence of the teachings and example and sacrifice put forth by Jesus the Christ. It is absolutely attainable for every single soul.

Peace

Is Jesus Christ God in flesh, a propitiation and substitutionary atonement for sin, a reconciler and justifier of a sinner, or is he merely a philosophy, a way of living, an example for people to follow?

I thought you clowns claimed to have read this shit?

46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Matt 25


So let me guess....your precious KJV fucked up the word "everlasting" and if you write it on a piece of paper and stand in front of a mirror and shove it up your own ass it does not mean that?

That is in reference to those who know fully of what is expected of them yet neglect their duty in favor of the things of this world, namely material things and power. It is equal to utter blasphemy of the holy spirit and the sins perpetrated by the fallen angels that are the cause of all earthly pain.

It has nothing to do with the ignorant who will be weighed by there actions justly and attain some station with below and of GOD.

Scriptural documentation to to qualify those going into everlasting punishment as "those who know fully of what is expected of them..."

Hell is to be for ten thousand years from the time before the flood.

Scriptures?

Hell, nor Heaven, nor Earth are eternal. It is written numerous times in many scriptures.

And those many scriptures are...?

Your view is quite biased.

All scripture describes a way of being that is beneficial to All existence for its sake, not the one creator God's. Following the teachings and direction of God is not missing anything's ass. It is a means to attain a blissful, productive, peaceful, meaningful state wholly as a whole in reciprocation to the One creative force that is responsible for all other good and creation known and unknown to man and his own flaw through choice.

Are you claiming that the purpose of the revelation of God in the scriptures was all a means to attain a blissful, productive, peaceful, meaningful state wholly as a whole in reciprocation to the One creative force that is responsible for all other good and creation known and unknown to man and his own flaw through choice, and not the revelation of God himself and the plan, means, and execution of the salvation of sinful men?


Is Jesus the Christ?
Did Jesus come in the flesh?