Can a xtian god be free?

[Captain Scarlet]

That's what I usually get Scarlet - a refusal to look into it properly. Do me a favour and preface all your future posts with this: "I have no idea what I'm talking about, or the intention to find out, but...". Thanks

Petulant indeed, perhaps you would care to address the points instead of chiding me for not having invested enough time in theology. Which religion would you like me to start with? Then which branch of which religion? Then which splinter of which branch? Then which shard of which splinter? Then which cult of which shard? etc. You can invest you're whole life in what you recommend and I bet you have not got a complete understanding of all xtian theologies (let alone world religions), that have ever existed; so what! The truth is I have as much if not a superior understanding of your faith than most of your fellow theists, enough to debate the topic. I don't say its comprehensive, nor superior in any way to yours. I do question the value of investing that time however, when you cannot demonstrate why your view is superior to anyone elses. You can if you like show me the superiority of your knowledge by addressing the arguments, instead of sinping. You have thus far not adressed why:

- Doing evil is logically inconsistent for a god, especially one that appears not to be all good acording to your earlier post. I accept that there are necessairly logical impossible actions this is not one however, and if a god id all powerful, there is no reason why he can't commit evil. The evidence such that it is would support my argument.
- Why your definitions are superior to other definitions
- Why a god that allows evil is differnt from one who perpetrates it (you totally failed to answer that)

Oh and thanks....

[fr0d0]

Scarlet - you just closed the discussion being dismissive, and I responded to that. No you want to go over what you've already discounted? I've pointed out the shortcoming of your approach... yes it's a common smoke screen to try to divide the orthodox Christian view to make it seem oh so diverse and complicated, but that is an excuse. The doctrine you're refusing to study is universal to mainstream Christianity, which you're addressing. Please don't come here belly aching whilst at the same time making pathetic excuses. Be a man and face the truth, or get out of my face.

[Anomalocaris]

.... Be a man and face the truth, or get out of my face.

Judging from your reliance on perverse fairytales for meaning and worldview, your are not a man. Judging from the likely content of your faith, you have no practical grasp of the concept of truth. Judging from your avatar, you don't have much of a face.

[Captain Scarlet]

Believe it or not you are not important enough for me to "get in your face". I asked you to address the question and end petty sniping. To which you have replied with a pointless ad hominem as if that has ANY bearing on the argument.

I am fully entitled to ask for a warrant as to why I should study self-reinforcing doctorines of so called mainstream xtianity, rather than others as you have no data (only an appeal to sheer weight of numbers) as to why its superior to any other form. It seems that unless we are theology scholars we cannot debate such issues, but unfortunately for you these and other contradictions in the xtian conception of a god have not gone away, and are debated by people who know more about the subject than you or I. I would therefore suspect that whichever 'doctorine' you suggest I should aquaint myself with, will NOT slam dunk your position.

[reverendjeremiah]

Thanks Zenith..now I know that the bible can be taken serious in some things, but is symbolic in others. Thats great Heretic.

So Jesus being crucified is merely a figure of speech instead of an actual event in history, sort of like if a bunch of people team up against you and dont back off on their argument, they are "crucifying you" especially if they are winning. God is merely a metaphore for the sum of things that men were ignorant about in those days..and even into the 21st century this metaphore continues. science has done a good job chopping away at the entirety of said metaphore, but ignorance prevails.

Its not enough to say the Earth is round, but that it is spherecial with an elongated border..thats much better.

You know, many people believe that, in this 21st century, we are the geniuses, while those in antiquity were all retards. Such retards, that perhaps they could not distinguish between a cow and a dog. And, as such, they come with 'contradictions' such as "the locust doesn't have 4 legs" - as if those 'idiots' could not count the number of legs of an animal, etc.

Okay..then why would they claim locusts have 4 legs then? It really, REALLY doesnt look good on them to say such, especially something as elementary as this.

Also, I am VERY aware that the bible is not a science book, but they make scientific claims of physical properties and they get them dead wrong damn near every time...also, it is suggested throughout the book that it is good for educating people in the truth of god and creation, and that it is inspired by god himself. You must remember, even though I understand what you are saying (shaving ones feet back then was meant to be shaving ones nuts and dick) you must ALSO take into consideration that this book claims to be divinely inspired and 100% correct.

[fr0d0]

I asked you to address the question and end petty sniping. To which you have replied with a pointless ad hominem as if that has ANY bearing on the argument.

Captain. I answered your questions precisely, and all I get from you is excuses why you will not look into it. That is your prerogative, as I've said. But please don't pretend I haven't answered you. It's unnecessary.
You berate me with your weak reasons not to look into it, and then it's me guilty of ad hominem pointing that out to you. Fine. Carry on.

I am fully entitled to ask for a warrant as to why I should study self-reinforcing doctorines of so called mainstream xtianity, rather than others as you have no data (only an appeal to sheer weight of numbers) as to why its superior to any other form.

What the Fuck are you talking about? Have you no idea at all about this subject? It would appear so. I can't make you think Scarlet. You have to do that yourself. When you're interested in putting in some effort get back to me.

It seems that unless we are theology scholars we cannot debate such issues, but unfortunately for you these and other contradictions in the xtian conception of a god have not gone away, and are debated by people who know more about the subject than you or I. I would therefore suspect that whichever 'doctorine' you suggest I should aquaint myself with, will NOT slam dunk your position.

No one is asking any more than basic knowledge of you Scarlet. That which is abundantly available to you. There are no contradictions and serious opposition gets no higher than yourself. It isn't seriously contended, unless you can show me where.

I would credit you with some intelligence in not making such obvious gaffs as you started out making on this site. At least with this smoke and mirrors technique you get to retain some credibility. That's all you can hope for I guess.

Seriously... lets stop wasting our time with this arm waving. If you want to talk about something seriously. I'm very up for it. This bullshit... I've had enough of.

[Godscreated]

Yes God is free, not free to do the things that are against is nature but free from the things that are against His nature, so there is no need in Him doing the things that are against His nature. It is quite simple actually, why do some of you try to make it difficult. Do you enjoy batting around things that are so easily understood. When a being is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent it is ludicrous to think that one can honestly believe they can define or dictate how that being should act.

[KichigaiNeko]

No GC your god is not free...he is a slave to YOUR wishes just as YOU make yourself a slave to his ego..which is just YOUR ego cathected onto an imaginary entity.

Xtains TOTALLY dictate how their god should act....like a misogynistic, murderous paedophiliac bastard..just like his followers

[Godscreated]

No GC your god is not free...he is a slave to YOUR wishes just as YOU make yourself a slave to his ego..which is just YOUR ego cathected onto an imaginary entity.

Xtains TOTALLY dictate how their god should act....like a misogynistic, murderous paedophiliac bastard..just like his followers

WRONG!

[Cinjin]

To answer your question ... OBVIOUSLY the answer in a resounding NO.

There's no way that the christian god could possibly be free with as many contraditions and paradoxes that the Bible has him faced with. That being said (and since I'm a deist myself), I believe that the one true God (whomever he/she is) is completely and totally free - because I don't believe he's perfect, I don't believe he knows all, I don't believe he's "got it in" for anybody or out to save anybody either. I don't think he's the big sky-daddy waiting for souls to love him. I think he may be the most missunderstood, miss-construed, blatantly falsified and unimaginable being that ever existed. In my mind, that makes him free. Hell, for all I know, he hasn't been to this planet for 6 billion years and doesn't even know we exist .... but than again, I can't prove any of this and don't care to. I'm simply answering your question about a god that IS well defined by a holy book ... the christian god. No he's not free and he's not somebody I would ever care to know, let alone, worship.