To all religious people

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Precisely why I claim that reincarnation back to earth does nothing to progress our souls in any way, shape, or form. One thing we know for sure. Nothing is "purified" by the hands or minds of men on earth. You must seek something higher.

reply to post by Deetermined

Precisely why I claim that reincarnation back to earth does nothing to progress our souls in any way, shape, or form.

Only because we're discouraged from using our pineal glands. If we were more inclined to actually remember past lives, we'd learn a lot more.

reply to post by Deetermined

God knew from the very beginning what Adam and Eve would do....even Satan.

And how do you know that?

This was all God's plan.

To have an evil world where people die?

The plan was to allow you the right to choose between good and evil.

According to Genesis 2 & 3, it was The Lord's plan that Adam and Eve would never even come to learn what good and evil were.

That was the point! God didn't want to force his creations to obey him and follow his will. He wanted his creations to do it of their own free will.

They didn't, though, so why is this game still being constantly played out, on and on? My suggestion is that we should seek an alternative explanation, for example: things are bad because that is just the way they are, and God did not make it that way on purpose.

reply to post by jmdewey60

And how do you know that?

Isn't God omnipresent and all mighty and all knowing?

To have an evil world where people die?

If God was capable of creating Satan and able to start all the calamities and disasters in our world I'm 99% sure He would probably have planned this. This world is apparently a test right? We have to go through it without losing faith am I correct?

According to Genesis 2 & 3, it was The Lord's plan that Adam and Eve would never even come to learn what good and evil were.

If you may be so kind, enlighten us with some quotes.

They didn't, though, so why is this game still being constantly played out, on and on? My suggestion is that we should seek an alternative explanation, for example: things are bad because that is just the way they are, and God did not make it that way on purpose.

Wait so the all mighty creator of the Universe, the greatest being known to man makes a mistake? Sound completely legitimate.

reply to post by jmdewey60

According to Genesis 2 & 3, it was The Lord's plan that Adam and Eve would never even come to learn what good and evil were.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... *deep breath* AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

I can't believe you just posted that.

Ok. "God" Is omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent. He knows all that is, has been, and ever will be. In fact, being omnipotent, he MADE it that way. His whim is fulfilled with an inkling of a thought, and he knows every single tiny consequence of his whim before it ever happens. That is the logical, rational definition of being omnipotent and omniscient. Are we all agreed on this? Good.

So...Adam and Eve. They partook of the fruit of the tree of knowledge. It was "God"s plan that they would never do so, according to you, right? Okay. Let's look at the 'facts', as presented by the Bible.

1. He planted a tree bearing fruit of knowledge, even though his omniscient nature undoubtedly informed him of the consquences of providing such temptation. But he still did it.

2. He specifically told them not to partake of the fruit, and his explanation only gave them all the more reason to disobey. Anyone with kids knows that if you try to convince them not to do something using only the reasons why they would bother, you're actually telling them, "Hey, if you do this, all this other really cool stuff happens!" That's what they hear. Psychology 101.

3. "Satan" was in the garden. A garden full of "God"s creatures...a garden whose nature is made pretty clear by the act that once Adam and Eve were no longer 'pure', they were cast out. So what the hell was "Satan" doing in that garden? "God" had to have known. He had to have known the consequences of letting "Satan" in (because surely "Satan" didn't BREAK in...) and he still allowed it to happen. Either he's not really omniscient, or he wanted "Satan" to tempt them. And since he knew that would happen, he also knew the consequences of that temptation.

Conclusion: Whether or not you're willing to accept it, the facts remain crystal clear in this scenario as presented by the Bible. Taking "God"s nature to be perfectly true and accurate as represented in the Bible, and taking the events portrayed in the Garden of Eden to be perfectly true and accurate, there can be no doubt as to the nature of the proceedings. To quote Morpheus:

"What happened, happened...and couldn't have happened any other way."

Allow me to clarify further. There were hundreds of ways to prevent Adam and Eve from taking the fruit, but there was only one way that what actually DID happen, could have happened - "God" wanted them to. For such an omniscient, omnipotent being, he seemed pretty helpless in those circumstances, yeah?

Before any of you jump on the "free will" bandwagon, realize this: when you have a being who is omnipotent and omniscient, that means the being can do ANYTHING, knows EVERYTHING, and so knows how to accomplish ANYTHING it desires in less time than it takes to blink. That negates free will, because omniscience covers past, present, and future, and omnipotence means influence extends into those times as well. If you know everything and can do anything, yet do nothing, you are an accomplice in the court of law. That makes "God" as guilty as any villain in the history of the world. In fact, he's as guilty as all of them put together, for not stepping in when he easily could have.

And if he truly was omnipotent and omnipresent, it wasn't just that he was helpless...he was helpless in a predicament of his own making. Each and every tragedy, disaster, massacre, and death of an innocent soul... He knew what would happen, he had the power to prevent it, and he chose not to. Either he's an idiot...or we've been lied to regarding his nature...or there WAS no original sin.

There was only first grade. And this is high school. But really, I think the bottom line here is quite simple: we need to change the way we look at "God". We rely on this being too much, we give it too much credit, and meanwhile, all of OUR responsibilities are falling behind because we're so focused on the afterlife and the promises of a dead man that we're ignoring everything that is REAL - in the here and the now.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

But really, I think the bottom line here is quite simple: we need to change the way we look at "God". We rely on this being too much, we give it too much credit, and meanwhile, all of OUR responsibilities are falling behind because we're so focused on the afterlife and the promises of a dead man that we're ignoring everything that is REAL - in the here and the now.

Matthew 6:33-34

33 But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.

34 Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.

Our responsibilities are falling behind because we're not seeking him first. If we were, the rest would take care of itself.

reply to post by Deetermined

Our responsibilities are falling behind because we're not seeking him first. If we were, the rest would take care of itself.

I've seen plenty of examples of this statement being so erroneously false, it's laughable. And if you cared to open your eyes once in a while, you'd see that majority of Christians are far too self-absorbed to care about the rest of the world. Their caring only extends so far as, "I must prove myself worthy of entering heaven." If 'salvation' weren't being dangled like a carrot in front of a draft horse, I can guarantee you wouldn't recognize Christians today. If they weren't being rewarded, and they were only being good for the sake of goodness, how inclined do you believe they would be to serve others before themselves?

It is in our nature to preserve ourselves. We've gone too long with the power to end the life of fellow man to not have a healthy respect for how easily we ourselves could die. And if there was absolutely no way that Christianity could preserve us except to give us peace of mind on our death beds, knowing that we made that many people breathe easier for us having existed, if we had nothing else waiting for us and our death would be the absolute end, would Christians still look at it the same way? What if you went to hell instead, for doing the work of Jesus? What then?

Admit it or not, I am willing to bet that salvation is the driving motivator in Christianity. People want to be saved, and they'll do whatever is necessary to ensure their own preservation. Boom. End of story.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Regardless, the problem as a whole still revolves around not enough people seeking God's kingdom and righteousness to make a difference, just like the days of Noah and the days of Sodom and Gomorrah.

The Bible says that the end of days will be just like the days of Noah, once again.

reply to post by Deetermined

Regardless, the problem as a whole still revolves around not enough people seeking God's kingdom and righteousness to make a difference, just like the days of Noah and the days of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Righteousness? I wouldn't trust mankind with righteousness as far as I could throw a piano. Every time mankind goes on a righteousness march, it inevitably ends in a power play to preserve ourselves, because that's the only real purpose, the only real hold, Christianity has ever had.

"Come with us, believe what we believe, say what we say, and you will never have to fear death!"

Take that away, and why would anyone care about Christianity? They don't want to work for their spirituality, they want it handed to them on a piece of paper.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

Righteousness? I wouldn't trust mankind with righteousness as far as I could throw a piano.

There you have it. You've answered your own question as to whether or not humanity is capable of changing as a whole.

reply to post by Deetermined

There you have it. You've answered your own question as to whether or not humanity is capable of changing as a whole.

Actually, no. I didn't. Mankind doesn't need righteousness, contrary to your awesome holistic all-knowingness that you somehow obtained from a 2,000 year old manuscript based around a dead demigod.

What we need is empathy. And empathy is the opposite of righteousness. That's why we've screwed ourselves over so badly. We're so intent upon perfecting ourselves, demonizing everything that reminds of we aren't perfect, that we've given up completely on UNDERSTANDING. Understanding breeds empathy, and empathy engenders compromise, and compromise promotes coexistence.

ANd that's what Christianity is all about. Subervience dressed up in pretty little bows of compromise, but underneath it all is authoritarianism and vanity redefined as mercy and righteousness. That's all it really takes - using your authority to redefine something, and within a few centuries people forget what it really means because it's easier than fighting the system.

You can see it in today's world.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


LOL! Yeah, right!

You've got millions of people seeking therapists to try and understand themselves and somehow you think they're going to be capable of understanding and being empathetic towards others! People are less capable of coping and understanding today than they were thousands of years ago.

Keep dreaming!

reply to post by RimDaas

Isn't God omnipresent and all mighty and all knowing?

You may have been told that in Sunday school when you were five, and have assumed since then that this was the case.

If God was capable of creating Satan and able to start all the calamities and disasters in our world I'm 99% sure He would probably have planned this. This world is apparently a test right? We have to go through it without losing faith am I correct?

I'm not trying to be mean and I hope you understand this is a rhetorical question, but are you insane? Can you possibly explain how any of that makes sense? Who needs Satan if you have a god like you are describing?
This is life and there is no other life available. That is my opinion, just like whatever you wrote is an opinion, not necessarily yours, but someone's who you have picked up on and assumed was based on something more substantial than just another person's opinion.

If you may be so kind, enlighten us with some quotes.

I cited where to find the "quotes". The tree of the knowledge of good and evil, do not eat of its fruit. The idea being if you do not eat of that fruit, you will not get that knowledge, that was the recommendation by The Lord in the form of a commandment, so how can you claim it was His will that they spend the rest of their lives sorting out what is good and what is evil?

Wait so the all mighty creator of the Universe, the greatest being known to man makes a mistake? Sound completely legitimate.

So what are you asking, if this title is accurate? That would fit in well with a hymn using poetic license to be hyperbolic, such as comparing their god to the gods of their enemies. The reality is a bit more complex and not so easily explained as that.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

In fact, being omnipotent, he MADE it that way.

"Omnipotent" is one possible translation of the Greek word, Pantocrator, which occurs twice in the New Testament, both times in quoting from the old testament.
That would be the Greek Septuagint version of the OT, where it is substituting for the Hebrew word/name, El Shaddai.
Probably a better choice for translation into English would be, Sovereign.

Are we all agreed on this?

Someone can imagine such a thing but it is not a definition in the real world unless such a thing exists. So it is then, until shown to actually describe something, a fantasy hypothetical definition.

1. He planted a tree bearing fruit of knowledge, even though his omniscient nature undoubtedly informed him of the consquences of providing such temptation. But he still did it.

Someone called The Lord planted a garden. It does not describe this person actually planting that specific tree. It could have grown there on its own or planted by another deity type person, such as the Earth or the Abyss.
We don't know that The Lord knew that the tree would be there, beforehand, or if The Lord could have prevented it being there if He did. He did know, as described in Genesis, some potential consequences if the people were so foolish as to eat from the tree despite His warnings not to. It never says in the Bible that The Lord presented a temptation. This is something you are assuming with no basis other than probably some talk meant to scandalize God.

2. He specifically told them not to partake of the fruit, and his explanation only gave them all the more reason to disobey.

That was the serpent who told Eve that it would make them like gods. The Lord said they would die.

So what the hell was "Satan" doing in that garden?

He wasn't, it was a serpent.

Either he's not really omniscient, or he wanted "Satan" to tempt them.

Obviously this person, The Lord, was not omniscient, and the story never makes it out as if He was. The story does not work, as you point out, if He was, unless The Lord is also supposed to be Satan, which He of course isn't.

Conclusion: Whether or not you're willing to accept it, the facts remain crystal clear in this scenario as presented by the Bible.

Maybe but your version is highly inaccurate.

the bottom line here is quite simple: we need to change the way we look at "God". We rely on this being too much, we give it too much credit, and meanwhile, all of OUR responsibilities are falling behind because we're so focused on the afterlife and the promises of a dead man that we're ignoring everything that is REAL - in the here and the now.

We have to rely on God for things we have no power over.
Jesus is not a "dead man" but is alive, therein lies our hope.
We do need to focus on the "afterlife" but to allow that to direct us to how important things we do in this one are, and how that affects what happens in the next.
We live in the real and the here and the now, so we have no choice but to, since for us, each individual alive now, there is no other option but to live in this universe as we find it, but know that we are the ones responsible for what this universe will be like in the future, and to ask God to assist us in it because that is the only way it will get accomplished.

reply to post by jmdewey60

"Omnipotent" is one possible translation of the Greek word, Pantocrator, which occurs twice in the New Testament, both times in quoting from the old testament.
That would be the Greek Septuagint version of the OT, where it is substituting for the Hebrew word/name, El Shaddai.
Probably a better choice for translation into English would be, Sovereign.

Hmm...let's have a look at that.

sov·er·eign/ˈsäv(ə)rən/
Noun:
A supreme ruler, esp. a monarch.
Adjective:
Possessing supreme or ultimate power: "the people's will is in theory sovereign".

Supreme or ultimate power. My point stands.

Someone can imagine such a thing but it is not a definition in the real world unless such a thing exists. So it is then, until shown to actually describe something, a fantasy hypothetical definition.

It's all hypothetical, yet it is treated as fact. So I'm taking the 'hypothetical' to its limits to show how far it is from fact.

Someone called The Lord planted a garden. It does not describe this person actually planting that specific tree. It could have grown there on its own or planted by another deity type person, such as the Earth or the Abyss.
We don't know that The Lord knew that the tree would be there, beforehand, or if The Lord could have prevented it being there if He did. He did know, as described in Genesis, some potential consequences if the people were so foolish as to eat from the tree despite His warnings not to. It never says in the Bible that The Lord presented a temptation. This is something you are assuming with no basis other than probably some talk meant to scandalize God.

Haha, you're wrong there. I am working purely from what I have been taught and told. The Bible may not have said "temptation", but there's saying something without saying it. He allowed the existence of the tree despite knowing what would happen. That right there says something. He gave them warning, but then "Satan" explained the true nature of the fruit. Now why would "Satan" be in a garden that "God" created? Nothing existed before, so it had to be "God", right?

Scandalize "God"? Don't insult me. Let us be reasonable adults here, please don't speak to me like a child.

That was the serpent who told Eve that it would make them like gods. The Lord said they would die.

An omniscient being allowed "Satan" into his domain, fully aware of the potential to undermine his attempts to keep his children pure?

Okay.

He wasn't, it was a serpent.

That's not what the Bible says. And isn't the Bible the ultimate authority?

Rev 12:9. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Obviously this person, The Lord, was not omniscient, and the story never makes it out as if He was. The story does not work, as you point out, if He was, unless The Lord is also supposed to be Satan, which He of course isn't.

Whoa, whoa! Now you've REALLY contradicted the Bible! How is it you're countering my argument AND countering the subject my argument countered?

You know, my research shows me that everything about Christianity is based on quotes that doesn't say what people think they say. The Bible implies numerous times that "God" is omniscient, but it skirts around actually saying it in full.

Maybe but your version is highly inaccurate.

My version is the version that is shouted from rooftops and pulpits all across the lands. If my version is wrong, then Christianity itself is most sorely mistaken.

We have to rely on God for things we have no power over.

Who says we have no control? That's what it's all about - we're afraid of having no control. Well, guess what...the birds and bees have no control either, and they don't appear to worship anything!

Are they so much wiser, that they can accept mortality and we cannot?

Originally posted by RimDaas
Specifically followers of the Abrahamic religions. I wanted to ask you something. We all know God knows everything that will happen and has happened. We also know that our destiny is already made for us. So let me ask you, if I am atheist, or am polytheistic, or I go against God's books, is it my fault? Why should I go to hell for something which has already been destined for me?

Under the Abrahamic covnent there will be a final judgement of all those who names are not written in the book of life will be judged on the law of love. From there you will either be thrown in the lake of fire or you will be on some place else. By that I mean it could be outer darkness or any of the other lower spiritual levels. The throne room of God and Jesus are reserved for those who have salvation from the finished work of Christ on the cross.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

Supreme or ultimate power. My point stands.

I don't think you are being serious here.
You are only using the one definition that looks like it supports your claim.
And you are stretching the meaning of that one you picked.
A king of a country is the supreme authority in that land but compared to other fellow humans. He has no power to reorder nature.

reply to post by jmdewey60

I don't think you are being serious here.
You are only using the one definition that looks like it supports your claim.

Are YOU being serious? I am using the one definition that looks like it fits the description being touted by the Church. If you have a problem with it, talk to the people who wrote the Bible and the people who are still interpreting it!

A king of a country is the supreme authority in that land but compared to other fellow humans. He has no power to reorder nature.

If "God" made the world, I would think he'd have the power to 'remake' it.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/37748ba6a18a.gif[/atsimg]

reply to post by AfterInfinity

Are YOU being serious? I am using the one definition that looks like it fits the description being touted by the Church. If you have a problem with it, talk to the people who wrote the Bible and the people who are still interpreting it!

If you really think that, then you should quote the verses in the Bible where it does say that.
And "the people" who are they exactly?

If "God" made the world, I would think he'd have the power to 'remake' it.

"God" is a word in the English language. So there is no place in the Hebrew text that mentions "God".
So who is it that created "everything"? That would be a word Elohim which is in the plural but has what it does in the singular, so to me it sounds like a cooperative effort between many "gods".
Go ahead and describe how you would go about creating "the world" if you had this sovereign power. I doubt that you would know how to do it. So it would be, I imagine, with any individual person.
The universe is an incredibly vast thing and you can't just make one in an instant, no matter what people may fantasize about it. It is just not going to happen. You are just stuck with the way it is and make do as you go from place to place fixing the universe which already exists.

Originally posted by RimDaas
Thats hilarious. God created us for what? So we could dedicate our lives to worship him while He threw wars, famines, and disasters at us, also creating Satan to make our lives even worse, so we could go to hell with him. And somehow, we end up being the bad ones.

Sounds like you've confused God with the god of this world.

Completely understandable since ONE of them is an imposter and a master of many disguises.

The Synagogue of Satan

One group and one group alone is responsible for virtually all wars and bloodshed on the face of this planet. This evil cabal is few in numbers but, like a deadly octopus, its tentacles reach out to grip and strangle untold multitudes of innocent victims. The initiates of every secret society and internationalist organization, from the Council on Foreign Relations and the Jesuits to the Bilderbergers and the Order of Skull & Bones, obey the dictates of this sinister group and tremble when standing before its leaders.

The cabalist group I refer to is the Synagogue of Satan, an ancient, yet modern, elite so politically powerful and so fabulously wealthy that even past history has been twisted, reshaped, and revised to meet its preferred version of humanity's gloomy, totalitarian future.

Religious in nature, the Synagogue of Satan is, at its essence, a grotesque, satanic cult. It's high council is composed of High Priests of Lucifer; these are men who literally worship death while practicing sexual magick and occult rituals of the blackest nature. LINK