Tracking Earth's Future via Current Events, etc.

[Coco Pops]

^ Now this gets interesting

[Gatefan1976]

just a few added thoughts...
Finally got my mouse back =) and apologies if cursor pad got cranky (creating a mess of sp's). Is that why it's called a
*cursor*..??!

Your thread dear, no probs

So, back to Genesis 3:15, where the serpent gets its head crushed while being pinned under the foot of (Jesus of Nazareth's) the enmity's foot or feet... If anyone wants to question God -- hold that thought and ask him when yah'all meet up with "Him".

Genesis 3:15 makes NO mention of Jesus, it is Punishing the Serpent, Adam and Eve. Perhaps you should hold that thought when you ask Odin *When* you meet him?
Or is demanding you bow to another "God" wrong? and if so, would not the people that bow to yours be just as wrong?
My POV is NOT about "God's", it is about being true to yourself. If your belief is that the Biblical God is "all that and a box of dice" then you surely owe your God that respect. If your "God" is a different one, don't you owe THEM the same respect?

It was explained to me via some more learned Bible teachers that----
God had a plan only "He" knows about on the why's, that "He" designed thruout the fabric of time from even before the *angels* were created. It's one of those back-up plans, in case such and such in plan A happens, then go to plan B -- which was the most severe version and extremist of any plans ever devised or imagined thruout history -- and it covers ALL of history (thus, it's HIS-story, not our-story =).
Remember, If GOD truly is the Alpha and the Omega -- the beginning and END to all things that exist--

A Omniprecient being needs no "backup plan" It goes to his will, or nothing. Your "better educated" person knows LESS than you do. I can respect your research on the subject, even if I vehemently disagree. I cannot respect someone who says "they just know better" for no darn reason SGalissa. You know your stuff, there is no denying that, I just ask you to look further.

(which btw, our universe shouldn't even exist according to the latest scientists' report, based on the CERN "collider" experiments, which is another subject for another time)..

Yes it should, it is just an off chance that things worked out the way it did *on this planet*. Of course, if you want to look at the long view of things, then I have to ask, how old is the world?

--well, then GOD knows ALL things -- from before they are hatched into existence and long after the deeds have actually occurred, etc. -- that's just a tidbit in the "knowledge" curve.

Why is there a "plan B" then??
You are destroying your own argument SG, that's just a FACT.

There is only ONE entity (persona) who could have ever accomplished such a bizarre feat or goal. GOD. Either Jesus is that suffering servant --also described in Isaiah 52-53, or he is not. There is no in between or maybe's.

Isaiah is written AFTER Jesus. Don't you think they would want some continuity after the Messiah??

No, not what one wishes to believe. I did more digging, but didn't mention this next bit at the time.

When I was reading about the Biblical book of Numbers 21:4-9, the brazen serpent symbol on the pole, I came across a few discussions about it elsewhere on the internet. Someone asked whether Moses version of the medical symbol came first or if it came from some other part of the world. Answer came back that it originated from Sumeria (Mesopotamia) or Greece.

In other words, NOT from Moses.

So, since the natives in the country of Iraq believe that the original garden of Eden was located somewhere along the Tigris and Euphrates, and Abraham (father of Isaac and Ishmael) came from the regional area of Ur, which was part of Mesopotamia, it would make sense that perhaps the information about the symbolic snake on the pole was handed down verbally by the people in the area to Abraham, and later eventually adapted for use by Moses.

Or, you are making stretches to include it into your belief structure, because if it is not Judeo-Christian, it is not real, just a myth?

I'm still sticking to the possibly understanding that the braze serpent symbol was used as a medical depository location -- as in, "go to the serpent pole for first aid supplies and medicines!". That would be the physical explanation over merely looking upon the symbol and getting healed supernaturally. I know folks who believe that just by sheer looking, the inflicted persons got healed. But for everyone else, it's posted next to where the medical supply tent is!

So...........
You are ejecting it from the concept of a miracle?

To anyone who doesn't believe in miracles, just maybe *that* is the answer.

Perhaps you cannot see non Christian things as miracles?

Also, if anyone challenges the Sumerian origin and claims that the symbol existed long before that -- well, just maybe it existed from the very beginning of the cradle of civilization. And where would that be? Wherever Adam and Eve moved to after they got locked out of the Garden of Eden.

That depends on how old you believe the Earth to be. Australian Aboriginals ruled their land for 50 THOUSAND years, long before the timeline of the Bible, so did the Native North American and South American People, and neither culture had any knowledge of God, or the Garden, or the sacrifice of Christ. You have a choice now, God allowed all these souls to go to hell in ignorance of his existence, or god is not the only "standard", which makes god a non-unique being.
You are free to believe whichever you wish.

That's the simple answer. And thus, this whole medical symbolism idea, came from by word of mouth by the LORD (God) to Adam, so that he might survive in the wilderness he was being exhiled into.

The very OATH of the followers of Asclepius calls on other Gods:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath
How do you claim ANY power over this?

I have heard the theory in our Bible classes, that there is also the possibility that if Adam is the beginning "daddy" of the human race, and had eons of years, if not centuries to walk and talk personally with "almighty God," then there is the possibility that humanity from its very beginning HAD all the info they ever needed for spiritual matters to be resolved.

Problem is that over time, the original instructions given to early civilization got corrupted and morphed into things that were so totally contrary to what God gave to Adam (or whoever), and that's why there might be so many similarities between the "religions".

So, how do you trust any religion?
They are ALL failed, because the existence of the religion becomes more important than the belief in the ideals of the religion.

So, no, I don't think the early *spiritual* cultures were a matter of one culture stealing off of or borrowing from another for its beliefs. Altho, Islam does seem to carry out components of both Judaism (the Laws) and Christianity, in the sense of taking Jesus' words literally of -- if what offends the body in any way, shape or form and causes that person to do wrong (against the rules and regs of their laws or THE LAW)-- so that it (that part of the body) must either get chopped off or the whole person is murdered to spare them from "sinning" again and again. *sigh*

So, Islam is wrong for taking some passages literally, whereas Christianity takes them figuratively?
What about when Christianity takes things literally, like you are doing here with the prophecy idea?
They are wrong, but you are ok?

I had a conversation with someone a lonnnnnnng time ago about that very issue, and tried to explain that it was totally futile to struggle against certain *sins* (against one's own inner self..hope this makes sense without further description.. *sigh*). That is why in Christianity, one does NOT need to chop off their limbs -- but go to the symbolic cross (talk with God on His terms) and seek divine forgiveness without getting struck down by lightning bolts, etc. If it were not possible (to stay intact and alive and freed from constantly dealing with those inner struggles), there would (probably) be a lot more "Christians" walking around taking Jesus' words literally, as the Muslims apparently have done, and be missing a few limbs or forfeiting their own life, because they didn't learn to control their inner struggles / issues that were clearly written as offending "God" in the Hebrew portion of the Bible.

Christianity did their share of "suicide bombers" in the past, they have now grown up with the rest of humanity to an extent. HOWEVER, if I wanted to take the viewpoint that Artood ascribed to me, I would be looking long and hard at the political/religious right who are JUST as willing to sacrifice their children as the Muslim extemists are, just with more distance between the bomb, and their physical person. After the "mission" however, they would treat them, well, as well as the VA treats people, like a inconvenience because they survived.

[Gatefan1976]

Yes, you did imply it however unintentional it was. Something obviously prompted flood stories, if that is the case, then it stands to reason that a common flood inspired (speaking from an atheistic POV) both stories. So yes, both stories ripped off existence. Which is really what your belief taken to its logical end is saying. You can't say "Probably" anymore than I can say "Probably" and somehow pretend there is some authority that allows us to unilaterally determine how probable one thing versus the other is.

No, You believe that the Epic of Gilgamesh ripped off its story from another religious source. Not that it is a fact or a probable fact, it is a belief. And yes, I believe that both stories are based on the same event, and only one is more accurate than the other.

But to sit there and pretend that an educational guess is enough to claim whether or not something is logical is no different than asserting a higher value to your own beliefs over those of others. Said assertion being implied purposefully or accidentally not withstanding.

Believing your "version" is correct is doing the same thing. You can hide and obsfucate it any way you wish, but if you truly believe in Noah's flood is "correct".........
I believe in "we don't know", and I see no failure in not knowing. We can "fill in the gaps", but that gives such beliefs zero credence. As I said to SGalissa, you are free to believe what you wish, you have no right to impose your wishes on others.
In short, Keep an open mind.

[aretood2]

OK, sorry for the delay, been busy

Ohhh, whole world of just wrong here.
The Dictators of NK are hardly benevolent as you well know Tood, they are absolute dictators, do as I say or suffer. This is the attitude of your God, do as I say, or suffer. It may not be now, but it WILL happen. Your god *is* a dictator, and who is to challenge "him", as there are no other gods to gainsay him? He even ADMITS his jealousy, his fear of other gods even if he can overpower them.

Of course, this falls apart when you take into account that God is not human. Is a lion evil for hunting and killing? Is a hurricane evil for the destruction it brings? What is good and evil? How do you know if something is good or evil? Right or wrong> Who decides? This conversation is more about deeper issues when you throw in "Why is there evil" for there isn't an easy answer. Because it challenges the way we label things forcing us to go deeper.

Should he "allow" us free will?
Yes, he should, but IF we are inherently flawed as a species, we will fail any test given to us, and a omniscient being would know this, thus the test is flawed, OR, we were designed to fail.
Which one do you want to embrace? You are designed wrong, or your God made a mistake?

When you say "Your God" It should be a lowercase "g" btw.

Was it a test? I don't recall reading that in the Bible. It just happened just as an apple falls from a tree. What made a mistake into a sin wasn't the disobedience itself, but the lack of taking responsibility. That went beyond a flaw, that was downright sinful. Adam choose to not recognize his fall by blaming God and Eve. Eve choose not to recognize her flaw by blaming the "serpent." What went on with the devil, is beyond our understanding and we simply don't have that information.

Adam could still have shown remorse and taken responsibility for his actions. Sure, maybe there wouldn't be a garden of Eden, but perhaps Cain wouldn't have killed Abel. Imagine what the world would have been like with Abel's seed? Not perfect, but probably not bad enough that Judaism would stand as a sole beacon of light for thousands of years.

WE are "rotten to the core"??
No, I am sorry, I will not accept that because I have seen the "lowest of low" people help others, and the "best of the best" do it as well with no other impulse than to do what they feel is right. If all we are is rotten, then we have no choice, we are flawed, and we have no one to blame but the God who made us that way. OR, we just accept that there are just some bad people out there.

I didn't say there was no good. Maybe I misappropriated that phrase. But the point is that I deny the idea of innate goodness proposed by humanists. Our deeds are ultimately selfish at the end of the day. Example, Would you choose to sacrifice your children to save 10,000 lives if forced to pick? Would you sacrifice your wife to save 100 lives? Like the classic Superman situation, but you have no superpowers and you have to pick. The point isn't who you pick, but how hard it would be to decide. But from a logical perspective, the choice is so simple. What does Spock say about the needs of the many? All morality, human that is, that people live by boils down to selfish self preservation or to cold calculating preservation of humanity, or religious conviction. There is no altruism in there, not in its purist sense. Each good deed has a reward.

My reasoning is perfectly logical.
If no one knows about "God", then is it truly a God? We are now entering the philosophical grounds of what defines a "God". For thousands of years "God" was no God, in fact, he was not even an afterthought, it took the actions of his "followers" to even introduce "God" to people who existed for millennia before your "God" was even conceived of.
In short, If no one cares about your God, and no one worships them, they have NO effect on the world we live in. Indeed, even if it does exist, it does not matter.

If no one knows about God, he is still God. For thousands of years God was God. If no one cares about him, he can still command the winds and the seas. He can still influence people's actions. Because he's God. It's interesting that when people make mistakes or evil happens, they blame the devil. But those same people would never credit God for anything good done by men. God needs not to be worshipped nor believed in anymore than I need you to believe that I exist in order to exist.

Yes this is very philosophical, only that we are of two very different schools here. You believe that thinking makes it so. I believe that what is, is and what isn't, isn't.

No, how DARE it claim that it is the truth of creation, while claiming that all other versions are nothing but "myths" and "stories". Gilgamesh is a "myth", Osiris/Isis/Horus is a "myth", Nifelheim and Muspelheim are a "myth", Quetzocoteal is a "myth", the Rainbow Serpent is a "myth". If it is not how the BIBLE tells it, it's just a MYTH. How DARE anyone claim that your story is no more than a MYTH as well.......
I am not the illogical one here, it is you, Sorry dude.

Only no one was talking about myths. Coco clearly stated that it was ripped off. In fact my defense covers the integrity of Gilgamesh's epic as well. Neither stories are ripped off as if in part of a ploy to full peasants into obedience. They all have some ground in reality, well...at least we hope or think or believe they do. You're pretty much arguing against something that wasn't said. And in the context of religion, I'd hardly ever call anything a myth in sense the popular culture sees that word.

Believing your "version" is correct is doing the same thing. You can hide and obsfucate it any way you wish, but if you truly believe in Noah's flood is "correct".........
I believe in "we don't know", and I see no failure in not knowing. We can "fill in the gaps", but that gives such beliefs zero credence. As I said to SGalissa, you are free to believe what you wish, you have no right to impose your wishes on others.
In short, Keep an open mind.

Whose hiding what? Certainly not me. I'm not the one hiding behind fanciful words like "Fairy tales" and passing off faith as facts that must be recognized buy all who are not idiots or fools. Coco, for example, with my full respect can say that they believe that all religion is illogical, only if he/she acknowledges that it is based on faith, not facts.

I have no problem saying that my belief is based on faith. In fact, my holy book says as much! Now there is evidence that correlate with it. But that is not the bases of my faith. One doesn't cause the other.

[Gatefan1976]

Of course, this falls apart when you take into account that God is not human. Is a lion evil for hunting and killing? Is a hurricane evil for the destruction it brings? What is good and evil? How do you know if something is good or evil? Right or wrong> Who decides? This conversation is more about deeper issues when you throw in "Why is there evil" for there isn't an easy answer. Because it challenges the way we label things forcing us to go deeper.

Now we are talking about the nature of a being, and I will quote Genesis 3:22
"And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."

That pretty much says that God is quite well aware of Good and Evil. He is not some kind of mindless force. Could he employ a mindless force, sure but that force is no longer mindless if directed. It also implies that we too are aware of what is good and evil, all on our own.

When you say "Your God" It should be a lowercase "g" btw.

Was it a test? I don't recall reading that in the Bible. It just happened just as an apple falls from a tree. What made a mistake into a sin wasn't the disobedience itself, but the lack of taking responsibility. That went beyond a flaw, that was downright sinful. Adam choose to not recognize his fall by blaming God and Eve. Eve choose not to recognize her flaw by blaming the "serpent." What went on with the devil, is beyond our understanding and we simply don't have that information.

And yet, there is no mention -in the Bible- that they were punished for not taking responsibility for their actions. They are punished for their defiance of God's rules. A deeper analysis can provide the context of Adam and Eve's failure to take responsibility, sure. A deeper analysis can also provide other reasons for the punishment as well. That's the "joy" of deep
analysis without access to the writer. Note that Adam and Eve never deny their wrongdoing, unlike say Caine who does.

Adam could still have shown remorse and taken responsibility for his actions. Sure, maybe there wouldn't be a garden of Eden, but perhaps Cain wouldn't have killed Abel. Imagine what the world would have been like with Abel's seed? Not perfect, but probably not bad enough that Judaism would stand as a sole beacon of light for thousands of years.

Should Adam have shown remorse and take responsibility? Of course he should have. As to the rest, I will bite my tongue.

I didn't say there was no good. Maybe I misappropriated that phrase. But the point is that I deny the idea of innate goodness proposed by humanists. Our deeds are ultimately selfish at the end of the day. Example, Would you choose to sacrifice your children to save 10,000 lives if forced to pick? Would you sacrifice your wife to save 100 lives? Like the classic Superman situation, but you have no superpowers and you have to pick. The point isn't who you pick, but how hard it would be to decide. But from a logical perspective, the choice is so simple. What does Spock say about the needs of the many? All morality, human that is, that people live by boils down to selfish self preservation or to cold calculating preservation of humanity, or religious conviction. There is no altruism in there, not in its purist sense. Each good deed has a reward.

Why deny what God said? He stated himself that we are aware of good and evil, just like him. Does that not indicate that we -just like god- have a moral compass? That compass may be informed by a variety of things such as the examples you cite (selfishness, convictions, preservation etc) and it can get twisted all around, but it must exist in order to be affected in the first place. To say we do not have one is to make the mistake that people do of Vulcans by thinking they have no emotions because they have chosen to supress those emotions.

If no one knows about God, he is still God. For thousands of years God was God. If no one cares about him, he can still command the winds and the seas. He can still influence people's actions. Because he's God. It's interesting that when people make mistakes or evil happens, they blame the devil. But those same people would never credit God for anything good done by men. God needs not to be worshipped nor believed in anymore than I need you to believe that I exist in order to exist.

I did not say God would not exist, I said he would be irrelevant. If you were slapped in solitary confinement with no access to other people, you would be just as irrelevant, yet still exist.

Yes this is very philosophical, only that we are of two very different schools here. You believe that thinking makes it so. I believe that what is, is and what isn't, isn't.

Not exactly.

Only no one was talking about myths. Coco clearly stated that it was ripped off. In fact my defense covers the integrity of Gilgamesh's epic as well. Neither stories are ripped off as if in part of a ploy to full peasants into obedience. They all have some ground in reality, well...at least we hope or think or believe they do. You're pretty much arguing against something that wasn't said. And in the context of religion, I'd hardly ever call anything a myth in sense the popular culture sees that word.

I am noting something that is ALWAYS said. The only difference between an Atheist and a Monotheist in terms of believing in gods is "+1" or "-1". I may be "jumping the gun" a bit, I'll cop to that, but at some point this always comes up.

Whose hiding what? Certainly not me. I'm not the one hiding behind fanciful words like "Fairy tales" and passing off faith as facts that must be recognized buy all who are not idiots or fools. Coco, for example, with my full respect can say that they believe that all religion is illogical, only if he/she acknowledges that it is based on faith, not facts.

That is because you as an individual are a smart man Tood, I have always said as much. In the context of this topic however, you must believe in the bible as fact for it's prophecies to hold any relevance, don't you?

I have no problem saying that my belief is based on faith. In fact, my holy book says as much! Now there is evidence that correlate with it. But that is not the bases of my faith. One doesn't cause the other.

Sure!

[SGalisa]

I'm gonna try to keep this simple -- in layman's terms, but it's a bit lengthy (apologies for length)
Some of this (eventually) connects with medical health issues plaguing our planet in greater and greater frequencies, so...

Ohhh, whole world of just wrong here.
The Dictators of NK are hardly benevolent as you well know Tood, they are absolute dictators, do as I say or suffer. This is the attitude of your God, do as I say, or suffer. It may not be now, but it WILL happen. Your god *is* a dictator, and who is to challenge "him", as there are no other gods to gainsay him? He even ADMITS his jealousy, his fear of other gods even if he can overpower them.

^ Now this gets interesting

(even moreso on the *interesting*... =)
Here's what flew thru my mind after reading just that one paragraph...

Because the *other gods* are inferior and man-made.
...enough said...

And who are the *WE* (that is, the plural *us* and *our*) in Genesis 1:26...?
(Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? = basic *Christian* POV of God)
The LORD God is ONE (ONE BEING / ONE ENTITY -- there is no other divine entity involved, yet Genesis 1:26 describes himself as a plurality of an entity... (the written Hebrew states it that way?? Anyone knowledgeable of that actual Hebrew vs. standard bible translations?)

(NIV)
Gen. 1:26) Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness..."

As for those who believe in this dictator "God" -- he is a "loving" disciplinarian. Being guided by a genuine, true love in action -- to discipline those it loves to guard them from external dangers they are unaware of (parents discipline their children to guide them from hurting themself in various ways..). In our childhood, we think our strict parents are just being mean and nasty, until we grow up and have kids of our own. Hmmm... mom and dad were on to something important, but our limited (childish) minds thought of them as harsh and evil, instead.


Anywho... "God" looks out for our well being -- that is, how to stay in optimum health -- both emotionally and physically. The disciplines in the physical is super important to guard us to be healthy, become healthy and stay healthy! That's what all those do's and don't's mean in *His* dictatorialish type of commands.

How many Buddhists and Taoists are strict and restricting in their health issues -- and why is that? Because they feel like it? Probably not (as in *feeling* like being strict). It's probably more of an observation of watching people who don't care about their health going downhill and really struggling for what might seem like an eternity to get better. So, instead of caring less about one's own health in body, mind and spirit, they discipline themselves to stay healthy and alert to things that might otherwise ail them and diminish their health into degrees that they might never recover from.

Yoga as therapy exercises, in spoiler quotes...

Spoiler:

Look at the popularity of the physical exercises in yoga. There are some yoga exercises that are critical in being used to help people suffering from chronic degenerative spinal problems. I can agree with this, because even tho I personally am not limber enough to twist into a human pretzel shape and do advanced gymnastics (never could do that anyway), there are some yoga exercises that have helped me tremendously be able to regain mobility after suffering from several bouts of chronic, muscular back spasms which were caused from herniated, slipped discs. I've been on various medicines, but nothing has really helped me significantly as much as the yoga (therapy) exercises. The exercises WORK (are very helpful and effective); but it requires constant discipline and regular treatments in order to avoid living on pain meds and seeking potential surgeries to correct the problem. BTW, from what I've read, some of those surgeries are failed surgeries, because the degenerative issues eventually progress to the next joint, etc.)

So, just as Buddhists & other "religions" are strict in their mental and dietary measures, so that similar philosophy is with the Judaeo / Christian "God". "God" knows what will harm our health in ways that we might not be able to deal with, so he set up strict guidelines of rules and regs to follow -- so that we might only worry or concern ourselves with such things in a few and far in-between basis of being sick.

I say that, because of the so-called claims of obesity issues plaguing our planet, and various leaders claiming to have the answers on how to cure this particular "FAT" problem. Some people cannot help being obese, because that problem seems inherited in their families; and no matter what they do, they suffer from never being able to get skinny, or within a happy, healthy weight level.

When the Hebrew scriptures were written, it is believed that there was no modern refrigeration or preservation systems, so the "Hebrews" (Jewish people) were commanded to keep the utensils used on their meats separate from their dairy and veggies/fruits. Medical scientists in our modern times have discovered that some meats carry various diseases that if the same food utensils are used from raw meats to veggies or dairy, and the food is improperly cooked, people get sick, if not deathly ill.

So, yeah, there is a reason why the Jewish "God" was so strict when he set up all those rules. Same other issues apply to general hygiene and sanitary measures. People get sick with gosh knows what if they doNOT practice SAFE hygiene methods. I don't think anyone now-a-days needs to read a hundred page, college level dissertation (research thesis) on figuring that out. Common sense says more than a piece of paper with words on it anyway! You touch something that causes a rash or sore or whatever horrible health issue, you're going to suffer from something very BAD because of it.

How many stories in today's world do we hear of people getting sick on cruises or from salad bars, because the foods were not properly processed somewhere along the agricultural to store to consumer's actual digestive path? How many intestinal problems do people have, because of virus bugs, or parasites and even worms growing inside that eat a person out, while they are still alive?


I could tell dozens of horror stories about how elderly folks (and especially younger children, too, and folks in general who lack common sense and simply doNOT THINK of what they are doing) do things with their very germy underclothes, and then put their fingers in their mouth, chew off a hangnail or clean their fingernails with their teeth before washing their hands between the two processes. And if a guardian or health aid is not watching and tracking their bad health habits, they get sick with something awful. Quite simply -- It's disgusting; and then it sometimes costs lots of money to make them heal from whatever they got sick from, because of what they just did..!

Some of the more observantly alert people have gotten so paranoid from not knowing who touched what, where and when that they travel everywhere with hand sanitizer. And now we're being told that the hand sanitizers aren't strong enough any more, because they are being overused. There is no more *SAFE* middle ground.

There is a lot of medical stuff in the Bible that I never knew was actually in there, because I was raised to believe it was just spiritual stuff ONLY; and so I never read the bible because spiritual things simply never interested me when I was growing up (in my preteen and teen years). I thought the Bible was just too restrictive, and harsh (or boring in other parts of "The Bible"), until I actually read it -- and understood it from a (more Divine Force in our universe, who knows it all) Master *physician's POV*.
So, yes, I now can understand the why's on WHY "GOD" made so many---

"Thou shalt not..." and "Thou shalt" (or should do...!) with so many *!!!!!!* (exclamation points) in such commands. The commands are there to basically protect us. But sadly, that is NOT the way most people (who disagree with Biblical commands) see the issues being made.

[SoulReaver]

[SGalisa]

Sometimes, it's just difficult to keep up with these topics.
-- so apologies, I can't reply on everything at the moment.

Genesis 3:15 makes NO mention of Jesus, it is Punishing the Serpent, Adam and Eve. Perhaps you should hold that thought when you ask Odin *When* you meet him?
Or is demanding you bow to another "God" wrong? and if so, would not the people that bow to yours be just as wrong?
My POV is NOT about "God's", it is about being true to yourself. If your belief is that the Biblical God is "all that and a box of dice" then you surely owe your God that respect. If your "God" is a different one, don't you owe THEM the same respect?

You're being too nit-picky here about Jesus.
Of course Jesus is NOT mentioned--by name *ANY* where in the Hebrew Testament. Christianity cannot comprehend the prophetic imageries without being taught by Messianic Jews who learned it before us, and handed down the info to us in ways that they *finally* put together the pieces of the "GIANT" Bible puzzle (of historic events in history) in ways that finally made perfect sense.

Those of us (and I'm including myself from my BC years, that is, before understanding on the prophetic Messianic level), who doNOT understand the Bible will NEVER EVER comprehend Jesus EVER in ANY of this, because we (our brains) are NOT wired to think that way.

Instead, us non-brainiacs might be thinking -- hello all of you spiritual, religious brains, and anyone else attempting to rationalize around the bible (BECAUSE of a lack of understanding it properly) -- please simplify this gobbly gook in ways that *even* a child could (finally and always) understand. (hint, hint?)

I wrote the info as it was taught to me by Messianic teachers. This is not something I personally whipped up for my own interpretative liking... I'm merely sharing the info and passing on what they *shared*.
Besides, knowing now what I've read thruout the entire Bible, and now knowing (reading or *possibly* understanding this stuff from the Messianic Jewish POV) of the other prophetic items of significant importance that most of this world has no idea about (such as the identity of "THE Angel of the LORD"), well, (generic) *you* have no idea how hard it is to learn about these things and keep quiet about what we've been taught about. Learning new things is sometimes so awesome--it's sort of like looking at sparkling dots (stars) in the night sky are actually swirling galaxies when shown via those amazingly zoomed in Hubble pictures we have only seen within the last few decades (or less?). Thus,
Knowledge shall increase.

From where and how I learned about the bible in recent decades in contrast to where and how I started from (BC years= total ignorance / lack of actual understanding, and having apathy result..)--
This has nothing to do with pushing "Christianity" on another person or converting folks to one side of thinking or another, but simply *sharing* what got us so excited about what we learned -- when we finally learned about it! It's merely exploring data that we *NEVER* understood before. What anyone believes afterward, is between them and *U-know-Who* in that cloaked universal dimension, which is currently beyond our limited realm(s) of (simplified) understanding. =)
*sigh*

It was explained to me via some more learned Bible teachers that----
God had a plan only "He" knows about on the why's, that "He" designed thruout the fabric of time from even before the *angels* were created. It's one of those back-up plans, in case such and such in plan A happens, then go to plan B -- which was the most severe version and extremist of any plans ever devised or imagined thruout history -- and it covers ALL of history (thus, it's HIS-story, not our-story =).
Remember, If GOD truly is the Alpha and the Omega -- the beginning and END to all things that exist--

A Omniprecient being needs no "backup plan" It goes to his will, or nothing.

you forgot the rest of it

--well, then GOD knows ALL things -- from before they are hatched into existence and long after the deeds have actually occurred, etc. -- that's just a tidbit in the "knowledge" curve.

Anywho, regardless of the missing ending...you mentioned--

A Omniprecient being needs no "backup plan" It goes to his will, or nothing.

Obviously. But you are being overly *logical* here. I wrote it up that way for the humans who cannot comprehend "God's ways" on DIVINE terminology. It goes wayyyyyyyy over their heads (not referring to anyone specific on these forums, just people in the world in general). Some people need to comprehend "God" on a level where they can relate to and contrast that with or to their own methods of dealing with problems.
Was the problem of Lucifer falling and Adam and Eve disobeying from God's unique way of living or obeying -- beyond God's vision of knowing ALL things, if God is truly ALL-knowing of *everything* that ever was or is or yet to come? Of course not.

(With Lucifer, his issue was free will and desire to exalt himself above God's own throne.. in reality, from an outside observer's perspective -- here is a thought ----
"hey, Lucifer, cherub angel-- you were ABOVE the throne if you (Lucifer) were actually guarding *over* it -- as such. That wasn't good enough for yah? Ruling on a throne chair and handing out commands was your desire, just to feel what it felt like from "God's" POV...? Was that it (the problem)? And with Adam and Eve -- all they had to do was obey a simple command -- do NOT eat from one specific tree in the garden, lest "danger" will result. Regardless of how this stuff is written in the Bible, the basic stuff is easy enough to understand in both situations.)

But explain that to folks who argue with the Catch-22 rock logic (meaning a rock that is too big even for God to lift).
They'll run endless circles around this issue, and never ever see it resolved. So, I placed the term "back-up" plan in my comment, because God knew beyond the shadow of every/any doubt that this situation was going to happen -- if "He" created living, sentient beings who were able to chose right or wrong in their life's existence. Maybe the "back-up" plan idea is illogical for you to understand, but for me, when it was explained that way -- so that I could understand on my own, limited level of understanding, and then re-clarified that the plan was ALWAYS set into motion that way, regardless of what our minds might want to think, well, then I began to slowly understand God in human terms, even tho he is NOT human, but something beyond my own comprehension.


Anywho... Most people cannot comprehend why God would create beings who might rebel against his wishes, rules/regulations (laws) anyway. And realistically, no one knows of the answer on WHY God DID create all things to begin with. Was it Loneliness?? Existing ALONE in a dimensional universe that most of us either cannot comprehend or are only beginning to explore on various scientific levels, well, that sort of life just boggles our brains to even *try* to comprehend. Was God always alone with just entertaining Himself (His version of the *Me, Myself and I* entity) and making things at various times, just because He could..?

Or, on the other extreme, are we to imagine that God is just a sadistic *being* who likes to make things live and then watch them battle against each other in the same way -- younger children play with their toys, imagining the fake dolls as real creatures, and then pretend to make them bash each other into a dead oblivion, when they finally grow bored and discard them?


This is what is being implied when attempting to figure out a being calling itself "GOD" and then we, his creation, try to figure out in probable total futility, why HE did or does what HE does and then declares our future will be such and such if we fail to understand HIM on HIS terms.

[Gatefan1976]

I'm gonna try to keep this simple -- in layman's terms, but it's a bit lengthy (apologies for length)
Some of this (eventually) connects with medical health issues plaguing our planet in greater and greater frequencies, so...

Could not these issues be a result of our ever increasing modification of what we eat and what we breathe as much as any power of prophecy?

(even moreso on the *interesting*... =)
Here's what flew thru my mind after reading just that one paragraph...

Because the *other gods* are inferior and man-made.
...enough said...

.........And there is the gun I may have been jumping earlier.

And who are the *WE* (that is, the plural *us* and *our*) in Genesis 1:26...?
(Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? = basic *Christian* POV of God)
The LORD God is ONE (ONE BEING / ONE ENTITY -- there is no other divine entity involved, yet Genesis 1:26 describes himself as a plurality of an entity... (the written Hebrew states it that way?? Anyone knowledgeable of that actual Hebrew vs. standard bible translations?)

(NIV)
Gen. 1:26) Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness..."

So, he has a split personality disorder?

As for those who believe in this dictator "God" -- he is a "loving" disciplinarian. Being guided by a genuine, true love in action -- to discipline those it loves to guard them from external dangers they are unaware of (parents discipline their children to guide them from hurting themself in various ways..). In our childhood, we think our strict parents are just being mean and nasty, until we grow up and have kids of our own. Hmmm... mom and dad were on to something important, but our limited (childish) minds thought of them as harsh and evil, instead.

In our Childhood, yes our parents disciple us, yet we do actually *grow up* and learn to think and act on our own. We also know that parents that refuse to allow their children to grow up do a great deal of psychological damage to that child. Parents of babies and toddlers, sure parental rule is absolute for the safety and well being of our children, but as they age and mature, our role becomes less of one of absolute rule to one of explanation and education on *why* things may be bad for the child. I would never set absolute rules for my 10 year old without telling her why and allowing her some input into those rules, my 5 year old is another story.
Are you a child SGalissa? Of course you are not.

As for the rest....................
What you will probably find is what people have issues with are not really commandments 5-10, it's the first 4 that they may have issue with because if any person on this planet were to say such things, they would be a good candidate for Narcisistic personality disorder. Coupled with wanting to keep your "children" in thrall, they would be the poster boy for it. The human race has an all but genetic disposition to ask "why"? and that predisposition has lead us to some amazing discoveries. If we are not allowed to ask why, or explore those answers for ourselves freely without fear of retribution for merely doing so, then free will is a joke. It is up to US as adults to determine our boundaries, and accept the consequences of those decisions, but the only consequence should not be eternal torment in the hereafter when one of the "sins" is merely to exercise the free will we supposedly have. Is it crueller to keep a bird in a cage inside?, or to clip its wings and allow it outside merely to watch the other birds fly free? "Gods justice" smacks of the concept of "if it doesn't come back, hunt it down and kill it".

[SGalisa]

Correction--(apologies) I didn't read far enough down yet (as in the whole context)

you forgot the rest of it

sorry, my error for abruptly stopping there and reading no further at that moment.

Yes it should, it is just an off chance that things worked out the way it did *on this planet*. Of course, if you want to look at the long view of things, then I have to ask, how old is the world?

Why is there a "plan B" then??
You are destroying your own argument SG, that's just a FACT.

No I didn't. Just reinforced it as my own version of understanding a *divine* and eternal Being from my own limited details of understanding the BIGGER (Universe) picture. Catholic Sunday school didn't teach us the Messianic POV way. Our Catholic teachers just sort of repeated what the scripture verses stated happened, and now we're all stuck never understanding why in the universe would a "Loving" God even bother to create if He knew all this would happen before the events actually occurred. When I got to college and took a course in Logic, most of my classmates were Catholic, so the teacher (also the "religious" Chaplain of the college) had a field day (really an entire semester) of *fun* to nit-pick and poke at our brains over biblical illogical issues that he tore apart. The Catholics stood firm in their beliefs, so the teacher didn't really win our hearts or minds over to his way of thinking.

Isaiah is written AFTER Jesus. Don't you think they would want some continuity after the Messiah??

Seriously? Then why in the 20th century (after C.E.) would ALL of Jewish Israel, which denies Jesus being divinity from God or God's chosen servant, etc (whatever), and yet build a museum that houses the entire scroll of Isaiah to be put on display for the entire world to see it? Most of Jewish Israel today, still does not agree in the Messianic POV, so to whoever supported putting the scroll of Isaiah (and building the museum itself to even *look* like a scroll shape), that logic you just mentioned doesn't make any sense whatsoever. To them, there is NO Jesus in Isaiah or any other Hebrew scripture, and yet they hold the book of Isaiah especially in high esteem and intellectual value.

[Gatefan1976]

Sometimes, it's just difficult to keep up with these topics.
-- so apologies, I can't reply on everything at the moment.

Don't be so hard on yourself, I think you are doing fine

You're being too nit-picky here about Jesus.
Of course Jesus is NOT mentioned--by name *ANY* where in the Hebrew Testament.

Of course not, Jesus was not the Messiah in Jewish tradition (we was a very naughty boy )

Christianity cannot comprehend the prophetic imageries without being taught by Messianic Jews who learned it before us, and handed down the info to us in ways that they *finally* put together the pieces of the "GIANT" Bible puzzle (of historic events in history) in ways that finally made perfect sense.

But you yourself have said it does not make sense *until it was explained to you*. That's not understanding, that's merely having knowledge of someone else's POV and accepting it as your own. I can understand Magnetic fields, based on what I read from a book, or hear in a lecture, but that in no way means I truly understand Magnetism. To do that, I would have to independently study magnetism. I can draw on previous knowledge, sure, but you need to do it for yourself to learn and expand the field, or in this case, expand your personal understanding of God.

Those of us (and I'm including myself from my BC years, that is, before understanding on the prophetic Messianic level), who doNOT understand the Bible will NEVER EVER comprehend Jesus EVER in ANY of this, because we (our brains) are NOT wired to think that way.

Why do you make that assertion?
We are curious beings, we seek to know, to expand, to grow. Indeed, I would argue that we ARE in fact wired "that way", to seek patterns and order in a world that seems chaotic. The thing is though, just because someone studies the same evidence, and comes to a different conclusion does not mean that they do not understand a different position.

Instead, us non-brainiacs might be thinking -- hello all of you spiritual, religious brains, and anyone else attempting to rationalize around the bible (BECAUSE of a lack of understanding it properly) -- please simplify this gobbly gook in ways that *even* a child could (finally and always) understand. (hint, hint?)

See, I view that as a cop out, especially in faith. If you truly wished to know Jesus and God, are you not better served by studying them for yourself?

I wrote the info as it was taught to me by Messianic teachers. This is not something I personally whipped up for my own interpretative liking... I'm merely sharing the info and passing on what they *shared*.
Besides, knowing now what I've read thruout the entire Bible, and now knowing (reading or *possibly* understanding this stuff from the Messianic Jewish POV) of the other prophetic items of significant importance that most of this world has no idea about (such as the identity of "THE Angel of the LORD"), well, (generic) *you* have no idea how hard it is to learn about these things and keep quiet about what we've been taught about. Learning new things is sometimes so awesome--it's sort of like looking at sparkling dots (stars) in the night sky are actually swirling galaxies when shown via those amazingly zoomed in Hubble pictures we have only seen within the last few decades (or less?). Thus,
Knowledge shall increase.

Don't you think it is just a hard for people of other faiths to not do the same thing?

From where and how I learned about the bible in recent decades in contrast to where and how I started from (BC years= total ignorance / lack of actual understanding, and having apathy result..)--
This has nothing to do with pushing "Christianity" on another person or converting folks to one side of thinking or another, but simply *sharing* what got us so excited about what we learned -- when we finally learned about it!

Nonono, I don't think this thread exists for you to convert anyone, I think this thread exists for you to speak about what you have learned, and I find your POV somewhat refreshing, and somewhat frustrating

It's merely exploring data that we *NEVER* understood before.

That's the frustrating bit
Why not say "exploring data that *I* have never understood before"

What anyone believes afterward, is between them and *U-know-Who* in that cloaked universal dimension, which is currently beyond our limited realm(s) of (simplified) understanding. =)
*sigh*

Why assume we cannot know the "grand plan"?

you forgot the rest of it

Oh no, I did not forget it

Anywho, regardless of the missing ending...you mentioned--



Obviously. But you are being overly *logical* here. I wrote it up that way for the humans who cannot comprehend "God's ways" on DIVINE terminology.

What if I started speaking in different gods terminology?

It goes wayyyyyyyy over their heads (not referring to anyone specific on these forums, just people in the world in general). Some people need to comprehend "God" on a level where they can relate to and contrast that with or to their own methods of dealing with problems.

How do YOU relate to God?

Was the problem of Lucifer falling and Adam and Eve disobeying from God's unique way of living or obeying -- beyond God's vision of knowing ALL things, if God is truly ALL-knowing of *everything* that ever was or is or yet to come? Of course not.

Exactly, and that is the crux of the problem.

(With Lucifer, his issue was free will and desire to exalt himself above God's own throne.. in reality, from an outside observer's perspective -- here is a thought ----
"hey, Lucifer, cherub angel-- you were ABOVE the throne if you (Lucifer) were actually guarding *over* it -- as such. That wasn't good enough for yah? Ruling on a throne chair and handing out commands was your desire, just to feel what it felt like from "God's" POV...? Was that it (the problem)? And with Adam and Eve -- all they had to do was obey a simple command -- do NOT eat from one specific tree in the garden, lest "danger" will result. Regardless of how this stuff is written in the Bible, the basic stuff is easy enough to understand in both situations.)

Which version are we talking about here? Ezekiel and Tyre, or Isaiah and Babylon?
As for Adam and Eve, lets look at the bible, Genisis 3-22:

And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.

Man became "aware" of good and evil, just like God, and in fear, God cast man from Eden in case he became immortal and became even closer to God. Now, does God have the *right* to do so? Sure. Do we have the right to examine gods motivations? YES.

But explain that to folks who argue with the Catch-22 rock logic (meaning a rock that is too big even for God to lift).
They'll run endless circles around this issue, and never ever see it resolved. So, I placed the term "back-up" plan in my comment, because God knew beyond the shadow of every/any doubt that this situation was going to happen -- if "He" created living, sentient beings who were able to chose right or wrong in their life's existence. Maybe the "back-up" plan idea is illogical for you to understand, but for me, when it was explained that way -- so that I could understand on my own, limited level of understanding, and then re-clarified that the plan was ALWAYS set into motion that way, regardless of what our minds might want to think, well, then I began to slowly understand God in human terms, even tho he is NOT human, but something beyond my own comprehension.

Why am I forced to understand anything by *your* understanding? Is that not the sin of Pride?

Anywho... Most people cannot comprehend why God would create beings who might rebel against his wishes, rules/regulations (laws) anyway.

Do you?
If your answer is "of course not", then how can any preacher of ANY religion tell truth?

And realistically, no one knows of the answer on WHY God DID create all things to begin with. Was it Loneliness?? Existing ALONE

SNORT.

in a dimensional universe that most of us either cannot comprehend or are only beginning to explore on various scientific levels, well, that sort of life just boggles our brains to even *try* to comprehend. Was God always alone with just entertaining Himself (His version of the *Me, Myself and I* entity) and making things at various times, just because He could..?

Why not? Perhaps we are no more than God's cosmic reality channel.
Interesting thought

Or, on the other extreme, are we to imagine that God is just a sadistic *being* who likes to make things live and then watch them battle against each other in the same way -- younger children play with their toys, imagining the fake dolls as real creatures, and then pretend to make them bash each other into a dead oblivion, when they finally grow bored and discard them?

I don't think your god is a sadistic being, I think the majority of people who claim some form of Christianity simply don't bother to explore their faith for themselves and expect answers from "wise men" rather than take the time to explore it for themselves. I think, if anything, your god is a product of the brutal time in which he arose.

This is what is being implied when attempting to figure out a being calling itself "GOD" and then we, his creation, try to figure out in probable total futility, why HE did or does what HE does and then declares our future will be such and such if we fail to understand HIM on HIS terms.

If our views are futile, why hold them at all?

[SoulReaver]

Those of us (and I'm including myself from my BC years, that is, before understanding on the prophetic Messianic level), who doNOT understand the Bible will NEVER EVER comprehend Jesus EVER in ANY of this, because we (our brains) are NOT wired to think that way.

so God designed so as not to believe in Jesus?

[aretood2]

Now we are talking about the nature of a being, and I will quote Genesis 3:22
"And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."

That pretty much says that God is quite well aware of Good and Evil. He is not some kind of mindless force. Could he employ a mindless force, sure but that force is no longer mindless if directed. It also implies that we too are aware of what is good and evil, all on our own.

It's more like an absolute monarch saying that he knows what is legal and illegal. No so much because he is bound by the law, but because he makes the law. He is the law and what is illegal is just a violation of the law. God isn't bound by Good and Evil, but makes that evaluation. Which is why he is good, because he makes that which is good just as the absolute monarch dictates what is law (legal) or against the law (Illegal). No one can use a legal discourse (that is a discourse based on political science) to say that the absolute monarch did something illegal, because he defines what is legal or not. He is not a mindless force, but he dictates what good is because he dictates it. That is, he invented the whole concept of good and evil. Before he made it up, it didn't exist.

A look into the Hebrew meanings of words like Sin sheds some light into this. Sin is related to the word for error with a similar connotation of "missing the mark." That is, doing something in a way that it wasn't meant to be. Since God made everything and thus gave everything its purpose as in what it is meant to be, then doing something against that is by definition evil/sin. An aberration of the intended purpose of the created item or concept.

And yet, there is no mention -in the Bible- that they were punished for not taking responsibility for their actions. They are punished for their defiance of God's rules. A deeper analysis can provide the context of Adam and Eve's failure to take responsibility, sure. A deeper analysis can also provide other reasons for the punishment as well. That's the "joy" of deep
analysis without access to the writer. Note that Adam and Eve never deny their wrongdoing, unlike say Caine who does.

That's the thing with deeper analysis isn't it? After a certain point you just have to have faith in the plane words surrounding things. Find a logical consistency and just test everything and keep what is good. But in the end of the day, after this the question is how much did we meditate on it? What lessons can we gleam from this and how do we incorporate it into our private lives? What can we learn about ourselves through these things?

Sometimes people do get caught up in proof (me included) that that detail is forgotten. Which is why the bible stresses faith. Sure, God could have made giant neon lights in the sky forever saying "Jehovah of Hosts is the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Israel and Jesus Christ is his son. Love each other and do good. Follow the commandments and meditate on my words." But then where would faith be? A word stressed as much in the old as in the New testament. Faith isn't faith if there is 100% evidence. Well...philosophically we'd have to have faith in the evidence so...you really can't get away from faith.

So we don't have access to the writer, but we have access to ourselves, to the Holy Spirit in us. To the ultimate source that inspired the writer and through that we use faith to meditate on those words and guide us in this life.

Why deny what God said? He stated himself that we are aware of good and evil, just like him. Does that not indicate that we -just like god- have a moral compass? That compass may be informed by a variety of things such as the examples you cite (selfishness, convictions, preservation etc) and it can get twisted all around, but it must exist in order to be affected in the first place. To say we do not have one is to make the mistake that people do of Vulcans by thinking they have no emotions because they have chosen to supress those emotions.

We are aware of what he made, yes. He dictated what is good and what is evil. Morality doesn't exist outside of him, it exists because of him. Morality exists outside of us, which is why we call an absolute monarch who does certain things "wrong" and "evil" and "a tyrant" and say that what he does ultimately violates some higher principles because said principles exist outside of him. Which exemplifies this verse" On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it?" Romans 9:20 (Cr. Job 33:13; Isaiah 29:16).

We have a moral compass because we got that moral compass, but that doesn't mean we always listen to it which then begs the quesiton. If we know that we are doing wrong, then why do we do it? A crime of ignorance isn't as bad as a crime done in full knowledge of the law. Ignorant actions that lead to death are called "Criminal Negligence homicide" while in full understanding of our actions they are called murder or man slaughter. The latter two receiving much harsher punishments as the former. Yet knowing that it is wrong (Godwin can go to hello operator...) didn't stop Nazi troops from throwing infants up into the air and catching them on their bayonets. It didn't stop Stalin from starving millions into death in order to subjugate an entire nation. Mao knew that what he was doing was wrong but he did it anyway. Andrew Jackson was told that it was illegal to force out the natives from their homes, but he did it anyway.

Crimes of passion are done in full knowledge of what is going on. But while all these things are "justified" in the minds of those who do it, the fact is that it was done. The justification was done because they needed to find a way around the moral compass. But that compass on its own is just a data gauge, it will not and never has, stop anyone from doing evil. The things that I mention have been more successful than our innate human nature. Vulcan emotions exist, but cannot be relied upon just as our compass exists, but it cannot be relied upon as our only barrier to doing bad things. Humanism in its purity is all about humans being good on their own. No need for social prerogatives or religious constraints. Isolated from all things we are just good. But that is a dangerous proposition that is not backed up by current evidence, and since they don't fall back on any "religious" belief, they got nothing but blind conviction.

I did not say God would not exist, I said he would be irrelevant. If you were slapped in solitary confinement with no access to other people, you would be just as irrelevant, yet still exist.

Okay, so what? This makes more sense than what I read into in your first post though. But still, so what?

There was a time when not even the Prophet of God knew his name. So when asked who he was God's response was simple, "I am who I am," Exodus 3:14. Being relevent doesn't make God not a god. It changes nothing. In a way, to many civilizations who toke anything Jews said or did with a grain of salt, he was irrelevant. But that didn't change that simple statement "I am who I am." Would Zeus be who he is with no one to speak his name ever again or to pray to him or his pantheon? God is the difnition of what is a God. That is why there can only be one. Even if Zeus exists, and Amen-Ra, and Odin, and huitzilopochtli et al, by Christian definitions, they are not gods.

It matters not what people believe, it'd be no different than everyone saying that the archangel Gabriel is a god. He exists, I wont contest that, but people give his limitations and accept his limitation but still call him a god. But I won't accept that he is a god, he is just something else.

Kinda like the Ori and SG-1. They'd come to a world and say that the Ori aren't gods that they are just ascended beings (basing themselves off of the Judeo-Christian definition of which nothing else could ever be called a god) and people would just be like "So what? Are they not powerful? Can they not do things with a mere thought that defies all understanding?"

I am noting something that is ALWAYS said. The only difference between an Atheist and a Monotheist in terms of believing in gods is "+1" or "-1". I may be "jumping the gun" a bit, I'll cop to that, but at some point this always comes up.

It's getting people to that point alone is like pulling teeth.

That is because you as an individual are a smart man Tood, I have always said as much. In the context of this topic however, you must believe in the bible as fact for it's prophecies to hold any relevance, don't you?

For the record, I don't do this tracking of events as per what Womble said.

Anyway, I believe it as a fact more than I believe anything. I hold it to be real, it is my faith. Nay, I understand it to be real, that is my faith. I don't believe it, I believe in it.

[aretood2]

so God designed so as not to believe in Jesus?

I think we can comprehend him, that's half the point he was made a man. To be relatable.

[Gatefan1976]

It's more like an absolute monarch saying that he knows what is legal and illegal. No so much because he is bound by the law, but because he makes the law. He is the law and what is illegal is just a violation of the law. God isn't bound by Good and Evil, but makes that evaluation. Which is why he is good, because he makes that which is good just as the absolute monarch dictates what is law (legal) or against the law (Illegal). No one can use a legal discourse (that is a discourse based on political science) to say that the absolute monarch did something illegal, because he defines what is legal or not. He is not a mindless force, but he dictates what good is because he dictates it. That is, he invented the whole concept of good and evil. Before he made it up, it didn't exist.

That is a circular argument, and one contradicted by the Bible itself. We are not "ignorant peasants" we, like God are AWARE of good and Evil, just like God. God can no longer claim absolute authority here as you posit -by his own words-. This is no "logic trick" or anything else, it is scripture, almost the oldest scripture we have access to in the Judeo-Christian faith structure. We ate the fruit, we became aware, we were punished for it. You either accept the fact that we are just as aware of good and evil as God, or we were punished while remaining ignorant with no attempt to correct our behaviour besides "do as I say"

A look into the Hebrew meanings of words like Sin sheds some light into this. Sin is related to the word for error with a similar connotation of "missing the mark." That is, doing something in a way that it wasn't meant to be. Since God made everything and thus gave everything its purpose as in what it is meant to be, then doing something against that is by definition evil/sin. An aberration of the intended purpose of the created item or concept.

If "missing the mark" has the consequences of "sin", then you have got some serious issues going on

That's the thing with deeper analysis isn't it? After a certain point you just have to have faith in the plane words surrounding things. Find a logical consistency and just test everything and keep what is good. But in the end of the day, after this the question is how much did we meditate on it? What lessons can we gleam from this and how do we incorporate it into our private lives? What can we learn about ourselves through these things?

Here is the crux of the Dichotomy of Christianity.
To meditate, to learn, to take lessons, ALL these things are, erm, "good" and I would agree with you there 100%.
HOWEVER.
You as a flawed person have no right to determine these things, only God can, and "just taking what is good" implies you know better than God. Just do what you are told, M'kay?

Sometimes people do get caught up in proof (me included) that that detail is forgotten. Which is why the bible stresses faith. Sure, God could have made giant neon lights in the sky forever saying "Jehovah of Hosts is the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Israel and Jesus Christ is his son. Love each other and do good. Follow the commandments and meditate on my words." But then where would faith be? A word stressed as much in the old as in the New testament. Faith isn't faith if there is 100% evidence. Well...philosophically we'd have to have faith in the evidence so...you really can't get away from faith.

I agree with this notion.
I have no problem with faith, I have a problem with peoples USE of faith. I have no problem with logic either, but I may have an issue with how they *use* that logic as well.

So we don't have access to the writer, but we have access to ourselves, to the Holy Spirit in us. To the ultimate source that inspired the writer and through that we use faith to meditate on those words and guide us in this life.

No, you don't.
Is the Bible -as a complete document- the pipeline to God, or is it not? If your answer is no, then some of the faithful would call you a heathen for even suggesting it is not.
Why should you be allowed to eat "pork" when another Christian cannot? Are they less or more faithful than you?

We are aware of what he made, yes. He dictated what is good and what is evil. Morality doesn't exist outside of him, it exists because of him. Morality exists outside of us, which is why we call an absolute monarch who does certain things "wrong" and "evil" and "a tyrant" and say that what he does ultimately violates some higher principles because said principles exist outside of him. Which exemplifies this verse" On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it?" Romans 9:20 (Cr. Job 33:13; Isaiah 29:16).

So you are denying the Bible?
We are *according to the Bible* like God in having awareness of Good and Evil, a state of being that we were punished for. So, We have an awareness we were punished for, but have no right to exercise that awareness?

We have a moral compass because we got that moral compass,

We did not "get" a moral compass, we TOOK one, and were punished for it. Here is where this system fails, it assumes we were given things, and we were not.

but that doesn't mean we always listen to it which then begs the quesiton. If we know that we are doing wrong, then why do we do it? A crime of ignorance isn't as bad as a crime done in full knowledge of the law. Ignorant actions that lead to death are called "Criminal Negligence homicide" while in full understanding of our actions they are called murder or man slaughter. The latter two receiving much harsher punishments as the former.

If Adam and Eve NEVER took of the tree, and Cain killed Abel, is Cain wrong?
He has NO knowledge of Good or Evil, He has no Knowledge of Law. He just killed Abel because he did.
Is he Evil?

Yet knowing that it is wrong (Godwin can go to hello operator...) didn't stop Nazi troops from throwing infants up into the air and catching them on their bayonets. It didn't stop Stalin from starving millions into death in order to subjugate an entire nation. Mao knew that what he was doing was wrong but he did it anyway. Andrew Jackson was told that it was illegal to force out the natives from their homes, but he did it anyway.

So what?
We know Man makes mistakes and is imperfect, that's hardly an issue. Did any of them "flood the planet" to cast their personal judgement?
Hang, on, that's ok because it was mandated..... by God............

Crimes of passion are done in full knowledge of what is going on. But while all these things are "justified" in the minds of those who do it, the fact is that it was done. The justification was done because they needed to find a way around the moral compass. But that compass on its own is just a data gauge, it will not and never has, stop anyone from doing evil. The things that I mention have been more successful than our innate human nature. Vulcan emotions exist, but cannot be relied upon just as our compass exists, but it cannot be relied upon as our only barrier to doing bad things. Humanism in its purity is all about humans being good on their own. No need for social prerogatives or religious constraints. Isolated from all things we are just good. But that is a dangerous proposition that is not backed up by current evidence, and since they don't fall back on any "religious" belief, they got nothing but blind conviction.

And Strict theocracy is all about denying personal responsibility, "GOD DECREED IT SO", yet it is not God who kills the "infidel" it is a murderous (WO)MAN who does it, but that's A-OK, because God decreed it to be so, so they are no criminal by man's "flawed rules", because man has a flawed concept of good and evil.

Okay, so what? This makes more sense than what I read into in your first post though. But still, so what?

What do you THINK I mean?

There was a time when not even the Prophet of God knew his name. So when asked who he was God's response was simple, "I am who I am," Exodus 3:14. Being relevent doesn't make God not a god. It changes nothing. In a way, to many civilizations who toke anything Jews said or did with a grain of salt, he was irrelevant. But that didn't change that simple statement "I am who I am." Would Zeus be who he is with no one to speak his name ever again or to pray to him or his pantheon? God is the difnition of what is a God. That is why there can only be one. Even if Zeus exists, and Amen-Ra, and Odin, and huitzilopochtli et al, by Christian definitions, they are not gods.

God, the Christian god is the definition of what his followers determine is a god. God did not create "Christian definitions" MAN did and by your own perspective, your definition does not matter. What you are mistaking here is relevance and power. We invoke the........ "old gods" every day, weather we mean to or not. Our days are Nordic, Our months are Greeco/Roman, our fellow planets are Roman, our Oaths are Greek, and so on and so on. If we Eliminated the phrase "Jesus Christ" from our common lexicon, most people would not even consider anything biblical "in passing" for their entire lives.
What then would be the relevance of your God?

It matters not what people believe, it'd be no different than everyone saying that the archangel Gabriel is a god. He exists, I wont contest that, but people give his limitations and accept his limitation but still call him a god. But I won't accept that he is a god, he is just something else.

So, what are the Angels?
Is Zeus and his ilk Angels as well?

Kinda like the Ori and SG-1. They'd come to a world and say that the Ori aren't gods that they are just ascended beings (basing themselves off of the Judeo-Christian definition of which nothing else could ever be called a god) and people would just be like "So what? Are they not powerful? Can they not do things with a mere thought that defies all understanding?"

I have no Idea how this is relevant to what I was saying.

It's getting people to that point alone is like pulling teeth.

Not my problem, nor yours for that matter.

For the record, I don't do this tracking of events as per what Womble said.

Anyway, I believe it as a fact more than I believe anything. I hold it to be real, it is my faith. Nay, I understand it to be real, that is my faith. I don't believe it, I believe in it.

That's why I respect your viewpoints on this issue.