God is GOOD and I will defend Him. A Challenge for Atheists

The correct mantra is, "It's true (Bible) because it proves its claims." I have never said that it is simply true because. Are you sure you are reading my words carefully? This is not the topic, however.

God is good because he achieved a reality that allows for free will as long as the rule of love is followed. Pride is the opposite of love. Love benefits the many. Pride benefits the one. This is a very reasonable observation. We can easily verify this by observing people who are full of themselves vs. people who are humble and loving. There is a verifiable difference. The proud see the humble as weak. The humble see the proud for what they are. Pride cannot be love, ever.

God is good because he created a universe that honors, protects and defends love for those who do the same. A proper man-made legal system should reflect the same value. This ensures freedom and equality for all. This is called justice. Prove me wrong.

See here. I did not just say because. I filled in the rest.

Originally posted by bogomil

Originally posted by SuperiorEd


Here is an article I wrote on counterfeit truth. LINK

Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

You wrote:

["I do not see my truth as counterfeit. If you do, they why are you still participating?"]

Because invasive counterfeit truths have an extremely unpleasant impact on mankind in general.

The openly monopoly-seeking part of the christianities being amongst the top five most destructive ideologies in historical time. There hasn't been much 'love' in that, only 'love' as a cosmetic bait.

That's why.

You don't believe, that the main opposition to your preachings is from a pedantic need of correcting sophisticated points of existential philosophy?

I read the offered link, which is based on a mindset of existential angst, unable to cope with uncertainty. A lot of unnecessary demagogy is presented in it, but eventually it comes around to the (surpriiiise everybody) statement, that all the 'answers' in the article basically rest on a self-proving bible.

Not exactly news, neither is it more convincing than the first thousands or more times THAT 'explanation' has been used. Repetition of the mantra: "It's true, because it's true" has become the desperate measure to attain (whatever ....respect, trust, privileges, monopoly....) to extremist christianity.

I ask the question again: "Are you trying to tire out opposition through this mantra of self-confirming 'truth'; or are you so optimistic, that you actually expect anyone to be indoctrinated into believing it from having this monotonous propaganda hammered at you again and again?"

I have personally very strong doubts about the efficiency of such a tactic. It'll most likely have the opposite effect, because the manipulative aspects are there for everybody to see.

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
I see you have concerns about God. As I have already given my answers to your questions in my postings, please give me a good answer to this question:

Assuming you could have the power of God, how would you create a world with free creatures who never choose evil? Assuming your goal, of course, was to ensure that these creatures had free will and were not automatons. You are ultimately after a being like us, possessing free will. What would your limits be and how would you ensure that they behave? Would love be the goal, or would there be something else?

Originally posted by TattooedWarrior
Firstly I am not an atheist, but I do have some things I'd like to put to you.
Why oh why do Christians always attach human emotions and logic to a Being that is supposedly supernatural? Surely a being capable of creating everything is beyond that.
Why did your so called loving God create a world where the only way to survive is by eating DEAD plants and animal flesh instead of providing something non living as food?
Why oh why do Christians refer to this 'God' as male - oh yeah easy one, because 'he' is a meglomaniacal, murdering psycho that destroys people who wether good or not do not believe in him or do as he says.

edit on 4-7-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-7-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)

Being to tired now (I am on european time) to answer the more complex of your recent posts to me, I can nonetheless answer this one without even overtaxing my brains.

The question you ask TattooedWarrior is easily answered this way:

In the dualistic asymmetry of cosmos (which is the dynamics of cosmos), the asymmetry favours predation, rather than symbiosis. The enforced growth of complexity (in a temporal context) is apparant in the predatory principle. Symbiosis would achieve the same goal of complexity, but it would take a considerably longer time.

This is related to the hypothezed negative entropy, a facet of the anthropic principle (which you have misinterpretated elsewhere, to 'prove' your pre-determined answer). There's some 'goal' to reach, before entropy sets in, a shortage of time. No matter the cost of suffering through predation for sentient beings.

But even predation isn't an answer to this problem of a running-down cosmos. Speeded up complexity (negative entropy) is a patchwork solution, only adding to entropy in the overall cosmic situation.

This is the closest to a 'rational' answer speculations based on scientific hypotheses can produce. It's housebroken in scientific terms, though ofcourse only AS an additional hypothesis.

And its conclusions are, that somebody has botched creation from square one. This cosmos is the result of incompetence.

reply to post by SuperiorEd


You wrote:

["The correct mantra is, "It's true (Bible) because it proves its claims." I have never said that it is simply true because. Are you sure you are reading my words carefully? This is not the topic, however.

God is good because he achieved a reality that allows for free will as long as the rule of love is followed. Pride is the opposite of love. Love benefits the many. Pride benefits the one. This is a very reasonable observation. We can easily verify this by observing people who are full of themselves vs. people who are humble and loving. There is a verifiable difference. The proud see the humble as weak. The humble see the proud for what they are. Pride cannot be love, ever.

God is good because he created a universe that honors, protects and defends love for those who do the same. A proper man-made legal system should reflect the same value. This ensures freedom and equality for all. This is called justice. Prove me wrong.

See here. I did not just say because. I filled in the rest."]

What 'reasonable observation'...that there is a 'god' being this or that way...and this is not taken directly from a self-proving bible as the source? Surely, you must have your 'absolute' knowledge from somewhere else then. But then it's strange that you sofar actually have referred to the bible constantly as an auhority, but now when this isn't convenient for the duration, you change attitude.

If you want to suggest, that you already have demonstrated the validity of the bible' (as a way out of this self-contradiction you are in now), I can inform you, that you sofar have refused to touch that with a ten-foot pole. You have carefully AVOIDED such a challenge.

It looks as if you invent 'arguments', as you go along.

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
I see you have concerns about God. As I have already given my answers to your questions in my postings, please give me a good answer to this question:

Assuming you could have the power of God, how would you create a world with free creatures who never choose evil? Assuming your goal, of course, was to ensure that these creatures had free will and were not automatons. You are ultimately after a being like us, possessing free will. What would your limits be and how would you ensure that they behave? Would love be the goal, or would there be something else?

If I were like 'God' all seeing and all knowing etc then before I created this universe I would have seen that by giving man free will that it would lead to the destruction of the human race and this beautiful planet that we inhabit. With that in mind I wouldn't have created it, and being outside of space and time I would have come up with a better alternative, although my feeble human brain cannot comprehend what that might be. As for setting limits for behaviour all I can say is that animals rarely show the character defects of humans and do not need to be told how to behave, they rely on their instincts - something humans could well do remembering. My instincts tell me that good is better than evil and that love is better than hate. My ego however doesn't always see it that way and I personally think that EGO is the root of the problem. I personally believe that before the global floods thousands of years ago ( Gilgamesh/Moses etc ) that the ego either did'nt exist or was at best an extremely minor part of our make up and that we humans lived more instinctivly - e.g in balance with nature and each other. After the floods I think that the ego came to the forefront of our collective conciousness because with little food or dry land around life became more about 'ME' rather than 'US' and that the group mind/mentatilty was replaced by the ego for self preservation and from there manifested and grew until 'what can I do for ME' became more important than 'what can I do for others' as we so often see today. Therefore as much as I would like to see a world were everyone loved each other, free from sin if you like, I know that that is IMPOSSIBLE because in everything there has to be balance. In conclusion I think if Christians embraced the fact that the bible clearly states that God has negative as well as positive attributes then we would'nt need soooo many threads here on ATS arguing about wether or not God is good or bad.
Peace - TW

reply to post by bogomil

Thanks for the reply Bogomil (where do I know that name from?). I just wish I had studied harder when I was younger because alot of what you are saying has flown staright over my head!!!!

Thank you for the reply. Here is something to consider in your formulation:

"A world containing creatures who are significantly free (and freely perform more good than evil actions) is more valuable, all else being equal, than a world containing no free creatures at all. Now God can create free creatures, but He can't cause or determine them to do only what is right. For if He does so, then they aren't significantly free after all; they do not do what is right freely. To create creatures capable of moral good, therefore, He must create creatures capable of moral evil; and He can't give these creatures the freedom to perform evil and at the same time prevent them from doing so. As it turned out, sadly enough, some of the free creatures God created went wrong in the exercise of their freedom; this is the source of moral evil. The fact that free creatures sometimes go wrong, however, counts neither against God's omnipotence nor against His goodness; for He could have forestalled the occurrence of moral evil only by removing the possibility of moral good."

LINK

Originally posted by bogomil

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
I see you have concerns about God. As I have already given my answers to your questions in my postings, please give me a good answer to this question:

Assuming you could have the power of God, how would you create a world with free creatures who never choose evil? Assuming your goal, of course, was to ensure that these creatures had free will and were not automatons. You are ultimately after a being like us, possessing free will. What would your limits be and how would you ensure that they behave? Would love be the goal, or would there be something else?

Originally posted by TattooedWarrior
Firstly I am not an atheist, but I do have some things I'd like to put to you.
Why oh why do Christians always attach human emotions and logic to a Being that is supposedly supernatural? Surely a being capable of creating everything is beyond that.
Why did your so called loving God create a world where the only way to survive is by eating DEAD plants and animal flesh instead of providing something non living as food?
Why oh why do Christians refer to this 'God' as male - oh yeah easy one, because 'he' is a meglomaniacal, murdering psycho that destroys people who wether good or not do not believe in him or do as he says.

edit on 4-7-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-7-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)

Being to tired now (I am on european time) to answer the more complex of your recent posts to me, I can nonetheless answer this one without even overtaxing my brains.

The question you ask TattooedWarrior is easily answered this way:

In the dualistic asymmetry of cosmos (which is the dynamics of cosmos), the asymmetry favours predation, rather than symbiosis. The enforced growth of complexity (in a temporal context) is apparant in the predatory principle. Symbiosis would achieve the same goal of complexity, but it would take a considerably longer time.

This is related to the hypothezed negative entropy, a facet of the anthropic principle (which you have misinterpretated elsewhere, to 'prove' your pre-determined answer). There's some 'goal' to reach, before entropy sets in, a shortage of time. No matter the cost of suffering through predation for sentient beings.

But even predation isn't an answer to this problem of a running-down cosmos. Speeded up complexity (negative entropy) is a patchwork solution, only adding to entropy in the overall cosmic situation.

This is the closest to a 'rational' answer speculations based on scientific hypotheses can produce. It's housebroken in scientific terms, though ofcourse only AS an additional hypothesis.

And its conclusions are, that somebody has botched creation from square one. This cosmos is the result of incompetence.

Originally posted by TattooedWarrior
reply to post by bogomil

 

Thanks for the reply Bogomil (where do I know that name from?). I just wish I had studied harder when I was younger because alot of what you are saying has flown staright over my head!!!!

You're welcome, and sorry if I uninvited interfered with your posting. But as you can see, I have a thing going with SE, and I couldn't resist to use this 'opening' to enlarge on a former 'quantum-religion' claim he/she made elsewhere.

The name Bogomil is an expression of european humour. It's originally the name of a gnostic-christian sect, which amongst other things (and rather unusual in european history) had cosmic dynamics amongst their 'complaints' against the false 'god' Jahveh.

On my part this name doesn't imply any religious attachment though.

My answer on symbiosis etc can be translated to normalese, meaning that e.g. a moral vegetarianism is an option for diminishing suffering (contrary to the more common predation) WITHOUT any 'god' having the alleged ultimate word on ethics, love etc.

Good thoughts. The ego you speak of is our animal soulish nature. All animals have a soul. Humans are the only creatures with Spirit. The spirit is the ability to create, think and reason. It is God's NOUS. The soul is a our nature that must be overcome. The intellect is the key to making this happen. There is a term that you need to know, or may already know.

Impenetrability

Impenetrability is the state of being whereby two things cannot occupy the same space. Emotion will always move past the space in the mind occupied by the intellect. Since two objects cannot occupy the same space, the stronger of the two will move the weaker. Seeking the good in any situation requires strength of intellect. The second step to finding harmony and equilibrium in the mind requires the use of intellect as the dominating force for guiding choice. When emotion obediently serves intellect, equanimity follows.

The key to overcoming the ego is to ensure that the intellect is strong. Equanimity is a state of mental and emotional steadiness arising from deep awareness. A constant state of equanimity is impossible if the five senses dictate emotion. To maintain equanimity is to guide action by intellect through the filter of mindfulness of purpose.

This is where God comes in for the human development. God offers help and education if we demonstrate our love for Him. Once we do this, we will then, by default, show love to others. Overcoming the ego (Self/Soul) is the key to making this happen.

Since we are not fully able to overcome the soul, God steps in with Christ and offers us the Holy Spirit to lead us to salvation from our nature. Christ did what we cannot. When you die, the cost of your pride and fallen nature is paid in full. Christ becomes your advocate as you enter judgment with God. As I stated before, I believe in transmigration of the soul. I believe that when the man dies, the soul goes to be judged by God. If your nature is not fixed, you return to the material world instead of finding salvation from it. Christ is the key to ensuring this transition. He advocates for you to God. You are 'IN' Christ. If I am incorrect on transmigration, then you have one life to get it right. Go back in the thread to see why I believe in this theology.

Originally posted by TattooedWarrior

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
I see you have concerns about God. As I have already given my answers to your questions in my postings, please give me a good answer to this question:

Assuming you could have the power of God, how would you create a world with free creatures who never choose evil? Assuming your goal, of course, was to ensure that these creatures had free will and were not automatons. You are ultimately after a being like us, possessing free will. What would your limits be and how would you ensure that they behave? Would love be the goal, or would there be something else?

edit on 4-7-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-7-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)

If I were like 'God' all seeing and all knowing etc then before I created this universe I would have seen that by giving man free will that it would lead to the destruction of the human race and this beautiful planet that we inhabit. With that in mind I wouldn't have created it, and being outside of space and time I would have come up with a better alternative, although my feeble human brain cannot comprehend what that might be. As for setting limits for behaviour all I can say is that animals rarely show the character defects of humans and do not need to be told how to behave, they rely on their instincts - something humans could well do remembering. My instincts tell me that good is better than evil and that love is better than hate. My ego however doesn't always see it that way and I personally think that EGO is the root of the problem. I personally believe that before the global floods thousands of years ago ( Gilgamesh/Moses etc ) that the ego either did'nt exist or was at best an extremely minor part of our make up and that we humans lived more instinctivly - e.g in balance with nature and each other. After the floods I think that the ego came to the forefront of our collective conciousness because with little food or dry land around life became more about 'ME' rather than 'US' and that the group mind/mentatilty was replaced by the ego for self preservation and from there manifested and grew until 'what can I do for ME' became more important than 'what can I do for others' as we so often see today. Therefore as much as I would like to see a world were everyone loved each other, free from sin if you like, I know that that is IMPOSSIBLE because in everything there has to be balance. In conclusion I think if Christians embraced the fact that the bible clearly states that God has negative as well as positive attributes then we would'nt need soooo many threads here on ATS arguing about wether or not God is good or bad.
Peace - TW

reply to post by SuperiorEd


Quote from your post:

[""A world containing creatures who are significantly free (and freely perform more good than evil actions) is more valuable, all else being equal, than a world containing no free creatures at all. Now God can create free creatures, but He can't cause or determine them to do only what is right. For if He does so, then they aren't significantly free after all; they do not do what is right freely. To create creatures capable of moral good, therefore, He must create creatures capable of moral evil; and He can't give these creatures the freedom to perform evil and at the same time prevent them from doing so. As it turned out, sadly enough, some of the free creatures God created went wrong in the exercise of their freedom; this is the source of moral evil. The fact that free creatures sometimes go wrong, however, counts neither against God's omnipotence nor against His goodness; for He could have forestalled the occurrence of moral evil only by removing the possibility of moral good."]

All of which says, that we have freedom, but if we use it in an unwanted way, there'll be hell to pay. How far do you intend to carry this kind of demagogy?

Such texts say this, or that or maybe something else, being close to pure scholastics, with an excess of circumstantial verbiage, and amidst all the semantic gymnastics of double-bind options some pre-determind 'conclusion' pops up.

Like this: "Have you stopped beating your wife/girlfriend/husband/children/whatever. Answer according to the conditions of my question".

I want to 'establish' if YOU, SE really is a good person, and this question will determine it. As to being non-sense it's on par with the main part of your way of arguing.

if god where real all he would have to do to solve this debate would be to stick his big toe in the sky for a few minutes every hundred years or so just to show that he is

A real
B. still here
C. still gives a flying F word.if in fact he ever did.

wouldn't have to interfere wouldn't have to pass any judgement all he would have to do is manifest...
god isn't as smart as i am i guess...

i don't want to start any blasphemous rumors
but i think that god has a sick sense of humor
and when i die i expect to find him laughing
---Depeche Mode

We can grab hold of misplaced concreteness here, but we need to be able to demonstrate in the lab of life. Fortunately for the believer, the lab work is done each day. A world that abides by one law is a world that allows unlimited creativity and free will to produce choices that perpetuate our progress against the flow of entropy. This is the syntropy that the previous poster was calling out when he/she mentioned the uneven nature of good verses evil. This is where Symbiosis comes in to even out the asymmetry between good and evil. Only a Good God could eliminate evil and still allow free will.

This is the entire message that God produces. He has overcome evil with love. The weaker overcomes the stronger by demonstrating the value of the weaker. Our free will allows us to overcome the greater urge of evil for the weaker urge of love and good. Free will and creativity then can be seen as God taking the side of the weaker force for the good of man. We now have our argument for God's goodness that cannot be argued. Not only can we make the choice to overcome, but He overcame the choice to bring ultimate evil on us. He is as good as it gets my friends.

1 Corinthians 1:27

"But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong."

Ultimately, our choice to side with evil eliminates any ground for us to stand.

Thank you Bogomil for helping me see this.

Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

Quote from your post:

[""A world containing creatures who are significantly free (and freely perform more good than evil actions) is more valuable, all else being equal, than a world containing no free creatures at all. Now God can create free creatures, but He can't cause or determine them to do only what is right. For if He does so, then they aren't significantly free after all; they do not do what is right freely. To create creatures capable of moral good, therefore, He must create creatures capable of moral evil; and He can't give these creatures the freedom to perform evil and at the same time prevent them from doing so. As it turned out, sadly enough, some of the free creatures God created went wrong in the exercise of their freedom; this is the source of moral evil. The fact that free creatures sometimes go wrong, however, counts neither against God's omnipotence nor against His goodness; for He could have forestalled the occurrence of moral evil only by removing the possibility of moral good."]

All of which says, that we have freedom, but if we use it in an unwanted way, there'll be hell to pay. How far do you intend to carry this kind of demagogy?

Such texts say this, or that or maybe something else, being close to pure scholastics, with an excess of circumstantial verbiage, and amidst all the semantic gymnastics of double-bind options some pre-determind 'conclusion' pops up.

Like this: "Have you stopped beating your wife/girlfriend/husband/children/whatever. Answer according to the conditions of my question".

I want to 'establish' if YOU, SE really is a good person, and this question will determine it. As to being non-sense it's on par with the main part of your way of arguing.

The universe is part of God. His "big toe" is all around you as an image. You are 'in' the image of God. The question is, are you reflecting this image back to Him as true?

Originally posted by CaDreamer
if god where real all he would have to do to solve this debate would be to stick his big toe in the sky for a few minutes every hundred years or so just to show that he is

A real
B. still here
C. still gives a flying F word.if in fact he ever did.

wouldn't have to interfere wouldn't have to pass any judgement all he would have to do is manifest...
god isn't as smart as i am i guess...

i don't want to start any blasphemous rumors
but i think that god has a sick sense of humor
and when i die i expect to find him laughing
---Depeche Mode

edit on 4-7-2011 by CaDreamer because: correction of lyrics

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

The universe is part of God. His "big toe" is all around you as an image. You are 'in' the image of God. The question is, are you reflecting this image back to Him as true?

Originally posted by CaDreamer
if god where real all he would have to do to solve this debate would be to stick his big toe in the sky for a few minutes every hundred years or so just to show that he is

A real
B. still here
C. still gives a flying F word.if in fact he ever did.

wouldn't have to interfere wouldn't have to pass any judgement all he would have to do is manifest...
god isn't as smart as i am i guess...

i don't want to start any blasphemous rumors
but i think that god has a sick sense of humor
and when i die i expect to find him laughing
---Depeche Mode

edit on 4-7-2011 by CaDreamer because: correction of lyrics

if we are created in his image...a mirror is a mirror...god is us we are at least partially greedy, lustful, vengeful, lazy,fat,horrible people so therefore it would be natural to say that god is all those things as well. the mortal sins are described as being abhorred by god, never says that they aren't part of him. if it is a part of us, in his image, it is a part of him.

god is not good

The hell to pay is the separation. I do not believe that God will destroy the wicked Himself. His plan, apparently, is to separate the two parts of duality (Good and evil). Remember, we are all fallen. Me, you and all of us. Evil stays here and Good moves on in the end. He clearly calls it eternal separation. God will not destroy them Himself. He will leave them to do it themselves. Again, you have free will.

I will choose the freedom of a world based on love. Two things are required. Love God for what He is and He will do the same for you. Love others for what they are, and they will do the same for you.

Everyone else can live by their own rules when God separates the wheat from the chaff. The ticket out of here is is not free, it actually pays you back for purchasing it.

All of which says, that we have freedom, but if we use it in an unwanted way, there'll be hell to pay. How far do you intend to carry this kind of demagogy?

reply to post by bogomil

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

The universe is part of God. His "big toe" is all around you as an image. You are 'in' the image of God. The question is, are you reflecting this image back to Him as true?

Originally posted by CaDreamer
if god where real all he would have to do to solve this debate would be to stick his big toe in the sky for a few minutes every hundred years or so just to show that he is

A real
B. still here
C. still gives a flying F word.if in fact he ever did.

wouldn't have to interfere wouldn't have to pass any judgement all he would have to do is manifest...
god isn't as smart as i am i guess...

i don't want to start any blasphemous rumors
but i think that god has a sick sense of humor
and when i die i expect to find him laughing
---Depeche Mode

edit on 4-7-2011 by CaDreamer because: correction of lyrics

that us utterly idiotic.... thats like saying bill gates is in my bedroom because i have a PC. that would take many many many leaps of logic and tons of supposition for it to be true.

you stated an opinion not a fact.

The universe is in the image of God's glory. Your computer is in the image of Bill Gates creative nature. Harry Potter is in the image of the author who dreamed him up. She created the character and others made the image appear on the big screen. Nature is the witness of God's glory for you to see in an image. His 'big toe' is here with you. If you read Harry Potter, you are experiencing the author and her creativity.

Originally posted by CaDreamer

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

The universe is part of God. His "big toe" is all around you as an image. You are 'in' the image of God. The question is, are you reflecting this image back to Him as true?

Originally posted by CaDreamer
if god where real all he would have to do to solve this debate would be to stick his big toe in the sky for a few minutes every hundred years or so just to show that he is

A real
B. still here
C. still gives a flying F word.if in fact he ever did.

wouldn't have to interfere wouldn't have to pass any judgement all he would have to do is manifest...
god isn't as smart as i am i guess...

i don't want to start any blasphemous rumors
but i think that god has a sick sense of humor
and when i die i expect to find him laughing
---Depeche Mode

edit on 4-7-2011 by CaDreamer because: correction of lyrics

that us utterly idiotic.... thats like saying bill gates is in my bedroom because i have a PC. that would take many many many leaps of logic and tons of supposition for it to be true.

you stated an opinion not a fact.

edit on 4-7-2011 by CaDreamer because: just opinion thats all...

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

The universe is in the image of God's glory. Your computer is in the image of Bill Gates creative nature. Harry Potter is in the image of the author who dreamed him up. She created the character and others made the image appear on the big screen. Nature is the witness of God's glory for you to see in an image. His 'big toe' is here with you. If you read Harry Potter, you are experiencing the author and her creativity.

Originally posted by CaDreamer

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

The universe is part of God. His "big toe" is all around you as an image. You are 'in' the image of God. The question is, are you reflecting this image back to Him as true?

Originally posted by CaDreamer
if god where real all he would have to do to solve this debate would be to stick his big toe in the sky for a few minutes every hundred years or so just to show that he is

A real
B. still here
C. still gives a flying F word.if in fact he ever did.

wouldn't have to interfere wouldn't have to pass any judgement all he would have to do is manifest...
god isn't as smart as i am i guess...

i don't want to start any blasphemous rumors
but i think that god has a sick sense of humor
and when i die i expect to find him laughing
---Depeche Mode

edit on 4-7-2011 by CaDreamer because: correction of lyrics

that us utterly idiotic.... thats like saying bill gates is in my bedroom because i have a PC. that would take many many many leaps of logic and tons of supposition for it to be true.

you stated an opinion not a fact.

edit on 4-7-2011 by CaDreamer because: just opinion thats all...

where did he sign his work ???

This is His signature. It's called the Golden ratio. 1:1.618

Originally posted by CaDreamer

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

The universe is in the image of God's glory. Your computer is in the image of Bill Gates creative nature. Harry Potter is in the image of the author who dreamed him up. She created the character and others made the image appear on the big screen. Nature is the witness of God's glory for you to see in an image. His 'big toe' is here with you. If you read Harry Potter, you are experiencing the author and her creativity.

Originally posted by CaDreamer

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

The universe is part of God. His "big toe" is all around you as an image. You are 'in' the image of God. The question is, are you reflecting this image back to Him as true?

Originally posted by CaDreamer
if god where real all he would have to do to solve this debate would be to stick his big toe in the sky for a few minutes every hundred years or so just to show that he is

A real
B. still here
C. still gives a flying F word.if in fact he ever did.

wouldn't have to interfere wouldn't have to pass any judgement all he would have to do is manifest...
god isn't as smart as i am i guess...

i don't want to start any blasphemous rumors
but i think that god has a sick sense of humor
and when i die i expect to find him laughing
---Depeche Mode

edit on 4-7-2011 by CaDreamer because: correction of lyrics

that us utterly idiotic.... thats like saying bill gates is in my bedroom because i have a PC. that would take many many many leaps of logic and tons of supposition for it to be true.

you stated an opinion not a fact.

edit on 4-7-2011 by CaDreamer because: just opinion thats all...

where did he sign his work ???

I fail to understand how, with the knowledge of dinosaurs, people still ignore the fact of their existence for millions of years, yet man says in a belief system of only 6000 years, that God is all creative and all powerful.
How can the evidence of creatures with factual, solid and physical evidence be completely ignored by a religious group? The belief systems of old had no knowledge of the history of earth. So somewhere it had to make up a creation point. That in itself is a belief in fiction. The very 1st book of Genesis IF it was the word of God would of told the factual beginnings of our world. God would want the truth to be known, wouldn't he?
How can the word of God miss out millions of years of this planets history?
If he wanted to plonk 2 humans on this earth in his name, surely he'd mention the bit about the ruddy huge beasts that were here before them.

I fail to understand how, with the knowledge of dinosaurs, people still ignore the fact of their existence for millions of years, yet man says in a belief system of only 6000 years, that God is all creative and all powerful.

Your answer is perspective.

Here is conjecture on my part. I'll use what I know from the Bible and fill in the blanks with what can be assumed.

God creates a perfect universe. Animals on earth and man in his early state apart from free will. Man was simply another animal. We know this was likely the case.

Satan and the angels, helping God create the universe, experience a fall. Satan tries to rise above God and God banishes Him to Earth along with the other beings that fell with Him. This part we know is Biblical.

I have already said, I believe that we are these beings, incarnated into the bodies of the new man, Adam. Seeing ahead that Satan would fall, God works it out for all of us to have a place to develop and regain our understanding of love and pride. Satan is given the prince status on earth.

John 12:31 Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out.

This part about Satan as prince of earth is stated in the Bible.

Galatians 1:15 "But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and had called me through his grace"

Jer. 1:5, "Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you..."

God, being all good, proceeded with His plan to get us back form Satan, the true enemy. Since God is good, He cannot mess with our free will. He can only separate us form the others who did not fall. We are placed here with a veil on over our previous knowledge so that we must live by faith. God teaches us the difference between love and pride while we are here. We make the choice along the way. At the end comes the final judgment. The truth cannot be known or we are not living by faith. God chooses this plan and gives us just enough information so we know how to figure it out for ourselves and make a choice based on our hearts.

"Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels," (Matt. 25:41).

Where are the dinosaurs? Who cares? We have a job to do. Free ourselves from Satan. God is good.

"For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment," (2 Pet. 2:4). "And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day," (Jude 6). "And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceives the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him," (Rev. 12:9).

Originally posted by sussy
I fail to understand how, with the knowledge of dinosaurs, people still ignore the fact of their existence for millions of years, yet man says in a belief system of only 6000 years, that God is all creative and all powerful.
How can the evidence of creatures with factual, solid and physical evidence be completely ignored by a religious group? The belief systems of old had no knowledge of the history of earth. So somewhere it had to make up a creation point. That in itself is a belief in fiction. The very 1st book of Genesis IF it was the word of God would of told the factual beginnings of our world. God would want the truth to be known, wouldn't he?
How can the word of God miss out millions of years of this planets history?
If he wanted to plonk 2 humans on this earth in his name, surely he'd mention the bit about the ruddy huge beasts that were here before them.