Questions and Statements about God...

[whar67]

2. But nothing can be wrong in your wold view as you've already stated. Things such as rape aren't acutally wrong but you just feel they are. Society deems what is right or wrong. So since that is the case nothing acutally made hitler wrong because society said mass murder was fine. Lets not pretend there aren't corrupt legal systems that judge right and wrong with a rubber ruler and it doesn't hurt if you line the judges pocket a little too.

3. But again you cannot prove reason and logic imerpcally there fore it doesn't exist in the impericist world view.

4. Says who?

5. So basically so long as society condones it that makes it right and when it doesn't that makes it wrong? What a wicked way of thinking.

6. Because God ordered it and it was to fulfill His judgement on those people for the wickedness they were doing.

7. God only gave such orders to Israel because He was directly in control. The first and only real theocracy. God can choose how he will deliver his judgment. Wether it be by natural disaster (The world flood, Sodom and Gamorrah), plauges (Egypt), raising Israel up to kill them (Midianites and Amalekites) or being taken into slavery (the Israelites after their many transgressions against God). However we must remember that God audibly told theIsraelites to do what they did. God didn't order single people to go in and do whatever. Also the teachings of the OT and NT both teach love, compassion and caring for one another. God in the bible isn't a wanton killer but when God feels that a people or nation has reporbated themselves and aren't capable of turning from their wickedness He will do what He has to. One example that people never talk about is Ninveah where God sent a prophet to tell them to repent and flee Gods wrath and they did and He did. The bible being the moral compass by following the teachings of Jesus Christ is prefect because there is no glossy grey area where we can manuver or any room for relativism. It says what it says and that is final.

2. Please quote the part where I state nothing can be wrong. If you believe wrong must be objective then state that and argue it not your misunderstood concept of my 'world view'. You have not yet address the weakness that objective moral produice. Chiefly that an agent of the divine can alter your moral compass at thier discretion. If an angel tells you you must kill a child and you are convinced it is geniune divine revelation you would not consider the act wrong. This is a stunning weakness of externalized morals.

3. I have to prove logic to myself which I have done. It is sad that I can not construct a simple arguement to convince you of this a thing that actually exists, however I do not believe you are entirely argueing in good faith. That is you can not change your mind or admit you are wrong.

4. I assume this is to "All people have a right to life" statement. This is one of my assumption that I accept as true to build my moral compass. I arrive at it using reason and logic. I will start with several our selfish assumption and use deductive logic to arrive at the position.

I want to be alive.

I want to be happy.

I want to be safe.

I want control over my life.

I can only achieve these desire if the following statement is true 'I have a right to my life' or 'I am the owner of my life'. I prefer the first but any statement like this works.

Now the logic part.

Some people have a right to thier life.

I am someone.

Therefore I might have a right to my life.

No one has a right to their life

I am someone.

Therefore I do not have a right to my life.

Everyone has a right to their life

I am someone.

Therefore I have a right to my life

Only I have a right to my life.

I am someone.

Arguement fails due to special pleading.

The only logical conclusions is everyone has a right to their life.

5. Yet it is vastly superior to assigning your morals based on the teaching of a Sky Daddy. Question why to atheist make up 5 ot 6% of the nations population and .2% of the prison population?

6-7. Handing waving trying to explain God homocidal rages. If the Jesus stand is crystal clear on morals why does no one seem to agree on what those stands are?

 

[whar67]

Your wrong Whar 67. All of our lineages can be traced back to 2 people, Adam and Eve. Adam was formed from the dust of the ground by God and Eve was formed from Adams rib. All of mankind has sprung forth from them. Life brings forth life my friend. And the source of all life can be traced back to the Father in Heaven, who is the beginning and the end. Now can you provide your evidence of life sprouting forth from non-life.......im waiting.....

Bold = Game ... Set ... Match

 

[blue falcon]

You find a God and a Lord God, when you see God it really means Elohiym which is God in plural. Then you have Lord God which mean Yhovah, which is God in the singular im assuming, dont quote me on that. Read Genesis and notice that the name chances from God to Lord God which if you were reading it in hebrew would change from Elohiym to Yhovah. Why is this? And yes im talking to you Douwanttogo2heaven but of course anyone can give their input.

And people say the trinity isn't in the old testament. lol.

 

[blue falcon]

Do you really "street preach" or was that a joke? I'm being serious.

No I really do.

 

[bless the child]

And people say the trinity isn't in the old testament. lol.

I had an argument wit a reverend about this is she got so pissed screaming at me saying THE TRINITY is NOT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT!!!! She wanted to kill me.

 

[blue falcon]

Simply stating "we know exist" does not will something into a special state of existence. These concepts do exist, in the human mind alone, not separate from it. Were the concepts of "Right and wrong", logic, ideas, and science used before humans existed? Surely not, because humans created them; meaning they are products of humans.

"Concepts" are defined as 1 : something conceived in the mind : thought, notion or 2 : an abstract or generic idea generalized from particular instances.

Nowhere does this assert that they are things that exist in nature or that they are anything other than mental. You're the one making that incorrect assertion, because your argument relies on it being true.

The fact that you are attempting to compare what you refer to as "God" to human-created concepts, only shows the lack of evidence you have that this "God" actually exists.

1. How do you know? That is an assumption. I say they were because before existed God created and used logic in ordering the natural system of things.

2. Logic does exist in nature. This is the very foundation of science. If nature weren't logical science would be worthless. As far as right and wrong it is no mistake that many peoples from different places around the world have similar moral and ethical codes to live by. People try to say that the 10 commandments ripped off spell 144 from the book fo the dead. I say that is attestation that God has put the inate understanding of right and wrong in our hearts by nature.

3. No not at all. There are sciences based on logic, a code of justice based on right and wrong, and people who live their lives in accordance to the will of God. All these things logic, right and wrong, and God cannot be imperically proven but exist non the less. You are assuming logic, right and wrong are human created concepts. can you prove that? Who created the idea of logic or right and wrong?

 

[blue falcon]

I had an argument wit a reverend about this is she got so pissed screaming at me saying THE TRINITY is NOT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT!!!! She wanted to kill me.

really? Thats simply absurd. What you mentioned here is part of it.

In Genesis God says let US make man in OUR likeness and in OUR image.

In Genesis 18 God appears to Abraham in 3 persons.

 

[fiat_money]

1. How do you know? That is an assumption. I say they were because before existed God created and used logic in ordering the natural system of things.

Can you prove this? Concepts are tools used by humans, fact. Concepts are based on cognition; which is defined as 1. cognitive mental processes; also : a product of these processes. Since both of these terms (concept and cognition) are defined as occurring mentally, one can derive that before brains existed they could not possibly exist. I'll admit, this is quite generous as it can credit the earliest of bilateria with creation of concepts/cognition. However, what this does, is set a finite limit on the earliest that mental-based process could've existed; the only way to challenge this is to prove that things without brains are capable such mental processes.

2. Logic does exist in nature...

Can you prove this? That logic exists in nature separate from the mind?

...All these things logic, right and wrong, and God cannot be imperically proven but exist non the less. You are assuming logic, right and wrong are human created concepts. can you prove that? Who created the idea of logic or right and wrong?

It is already understood that concepts are mental; meaning that, at most they require a mind to exist. To refute this requires evidence that concepts can exist separate from minds.

And lastly:

...imperically...

You've used this term a lot, it is actually "empirically"; which is the adverb form of "empirical". Empiricism is based on cognition; meaning it is something that is a result of some form of mental process as are concepts. To use a mental-based thought process to prove (proof is also a concept) that mental-based thought processes exist is a paradox, as you'll need to prove the tool you are using to prove the existence of such tools actually exists. Thereby making it illogical to do so.

This means your very first post in this thread is illogical in nature.

 

[longmeat]

Bold = Game ... Set ... Match

lol. and to think about it, god created everything from nothing, meaning non living>living. but it won't count because you don't really have to make sense or have proof when the bible is involved.

 

[whar67]

Can you prove this? That logic exists in nature separate from the mind?

I'll take a stab at this.

Logic is the product of the mind

Minds exist in nature

Logic exist in nature

 

[DoUwant2go2Heaven]

Bold = Game ... Set ... Match

"In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."

Genesis 3:19

Shoot me in the head when human beings turn back to primordial ooze.

 

[fiat_money]

I'll take a stab at this.

Logic is the product of the mind
Minds exist in nature
Logic exist in nature

So you're saying, "logic exists in nature, because minds exist in nature, and logic is a product of those minds"? This means the logic that exists in nature exists in minds; which does nothing to prove that the logic that exists in nature is separate from the mind.

 

[DoUwant2go2Heaven]

You find a God and a Lord God, when you see God it really means Elohiym which is God in plural. Then you have Lord God which mean Yhovah, which is God in the singular im assuming, dont quote me on that. Read Genesis and notice that the name chances from God to Lord God which if you were reading it in hebrew would change from Elohiym to Yhovah. Why is this? And yes im talking to you Douwanttogo2heaven but of course anyone can give their input.

Well first God has many names. The personal name of God in hebrew is YHWH, which we pronounce as Yahweh (Jehovah). Usually when you see LORD in an english translation of the bible, it is YHWH. Elohim in english translations is translated as God. Elohim is the first name God uses when He introduces us to His creative power in Genesis 1:1. "In the beginning God (Elohim) created the heaven and the earth." God let's anybody who has an ear to hear and a heart to understand, that God exists in 3 persons. Elohim is plural, which of course means more than one. Did I answer your question my friend?

 

[3rd Eye Vision]

really? Thats simply absurd. What you mentioned here is part of it.

In Genesis God says let US make man in OUR likeness and in OUR image.

In Genesis 18 God appears to Abraham in 3 persons.

So now the trinity is three people? Are you turning God into a human? And the holy spirit is a person? The truth is Genesis 1:26 indicates that there is someone (or more than one someone) God is talking to when making man. And btw, the numbers 3, 33, 30, and multiples of those numbers are used throughout much esoteric writings of those times as well as all times of history, as these numbers were considered to have spiritual truth in them seen by Kabbalists. The trinity, was a concept established by the Roman CATHOLIC church, so stop falling for this trick.

Read the Gospel of Thomas, as Jesus tells you what the Holy Spirit really is.

 

[whar67]

So you're saying, "logic exists in nature, because minds exist in nature, and logic is a product of those minds"? This means the logic that exists in nature exists in minds; which does nothing to prove that the logic that exists in nature is separate from the mind.

You are right. Total failure of comprehension on my part. Somehow I got it in my head your point was that logic does not exist in nature but in the mind. WHich would be false since the mind exists in nature.

 

[DoUwant2go2Heaven]

So now the trinity is three people? Are you turning God into a human? And the holy spirit is a person? The truth is Genesis 1:26 indicates that there is someone (or more than one someone) God is talking to when making man. And btw, the numbers 3, 33, 30, and multiples of those numbers are used throughout much esoteric writings of those times as well as all times of history, as these numbers were considered to have spiritual truth in them seen by Kabbalists. The trinity, was a concept established by the Roman CATHOLIC church, so stop falling for this trick.

Read the Gospel of Thomas, as Jesus tells you what the Holy Spirit really is.

Gospel of Thomas holds no weight, it's not inspired and thus not included in the scriptures.

Also, Jesus tells us in John 16 who the Holy Spirit is. Read it for knowledge and understanding. God bless.

 

[3rd Eye Vision]

Gospel of Thomas holds no weight, it's not inspired and thus not included in the scriptures.

Also, Jesus tells us in John 16 who the Holy Spirit is. Read it for knowledge and understanding. God bless.

Another zealot that doesn't even understand his own religion. Let me tell you a few things....

1. The synoptic gospels + John can't be divinely inspired either then. If they were, they would all tell the same story (with the same details).

2. Thomas was known as the Twin brother of Jesus, and while I don't think that means blood related, it means they were prett close.

3. You play right in the hands of the Roman Catholic Church by not taking into account works like The Gospel of Thomas, as you are only eating what they spoon fed you.

4. John 16 holds no more merit to me than the Gospel of Thomas does.

5. The writers of John, Mark, Matthew, and Luke are unknown and none of these writings are ascribed to the afore mentioned names.

I have a feeling I am wasting my time though, you are already lost.

 

[whar67]

Biblical scholars, most of them christians, attribute the multiple names of God to the unification of Judeah and Israel. Each had a separate genesis story that was merged together to make the current book of Genesis. This explains the slightly differnet versions of creation that appear in these books.

 

[3rd Eye Vision]

Gospel of John doesn't tell us much about the Holy Spirit. You told me to read John 16, all I could find that might resemble it is this...

John 16:13 "When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own, but will speak whatever he hears, and he will declare to you the things that are to come"

Spirit of Truth=Holy Spirit? Maybe, but a maybe is as far as you'll get.

 

[perspective@100]

Man, Thats deep... Scientology?