Jump to content

Greatest I am

Senior Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Greatest I am

  1. Would a moral God step up to his responsibilities? God cannot do miracles. If he could, he would. From God’s POV, all here must be perfect. He began in perfection and would not back slide to anything less. That’s scripture. It is to us to see things as he does. From mankind’s POV, all here is not perfection. This contrary and wrong POV is promoted by religion and is generally accepted to some degree by most people. I tend to agree with God even as most do not. From a moral stand point, most will agree, that if one sees a wrong that they can right; they will do the right thing and right the wrong. This is the right thing to do. The fact that there are preventable human evil acts being perpetrated by mankind, supposedly created by God, and he does not act, means that a moral God does not exist. A moral God takes responsibility and God is not stepping up. A moral God would. If he could that is. Just as all of us would. We are in his image and know that stepping up is a good idea. Perhaps God is not the miracles working super God. You know the one. The one that man has created to hold all of his hopes and wishes, dreams and desires, loves, ---- and hates ---, and although never seen in any real way, --- believers will kill for Him. Insanity. If God does exist, and is not moral, then what good is he to mankind or you? Would you want life without morals? No wonder then that Eve, the first to be as God/human, ----yes there is a difference, ---- had the wisdom to have adam/mankind, eat of it. What a wonderful myth. Believers who follow a God without morals, Bible God, should question why they do. God has a basis in reality but certainly not like the God without morals that has somehow been molded by what was initially, a rather beautiful ideas. The Bible. To think and act God like, is to ----- do unto others. If God creates man, then it should be for a best end. Not an evil end like hell. Fact is, many millions die daily of easily preventable cause. Allowed to by a miracle working God who just does not step up. The fact that God, who by definition, would have the attribute of taking responsibility, as any good entity would, proves beyond any doubt that a moral miracle working God cannot exists. And if there is a miracle working God, mankind should give him a thumbs down for his lack of morals. Can a moral God exist? Is it moral for God, who wants relevance to mankind, to not step up? As a creator God does he have any responsibility to what he creates? Regards DL
  2. Absolutely. If you know a bit of history youe will know that the ancient kings or Emperors would have themselves declared to be Gods and their sons, sons of God. Have ye forgotten that ye are Gods? ---Jesus. Pointless, unless you are admitting that the morals of the God you follow are crap. If you are, I am there for that and you will get your O P. Regards DL
  3. Less preaching please. It is annoying for you to speak as if you fathom the unfathomable. You just end up sounding stupid as you speak for God. All you have to go by is hear say so act like it and not like a fool who will believe what ancients wrote in a book that begins with a talking snake. And is real. I agree that any God would maintain control. FYPOV, God sat there waiting for what he knew would happen and then pounced to punish. Not much in the way of morals there and you follow that a hole. Sigh. And you believe that fool of a God when he tells you blood is required. Back to your hole cave man. Regards DL
  4. Good. No. The Bible is a book of myths and should not be read literally. The Bivble is a book of wisdom to me. Not a book that shows or directs one to a God. Jesus is an archetypal good man that Christianity has literalized to use to create guilt. More $$$ in guilt than without. Think for just a moment. Would a God create a perfect system that included his having to have his son murdered in? Is any God that stupid? Regards DL
  5. “Does it matter what God looks like?” It seems to matter to other animals and I think we should take a lesson from them. The God of ants is an ant. The God of lions is a lion. The God of man, has always been a man. Who but a man van put voice to the will of God? Even an imaginary God like bible God. Man has always spoken for whatever the word God means. My God is the same as your God. A man. As to what Gnostic Christians are. Basically a group with superior reading of scriptures that mostly go against the usual immoral Christian position. Regards DL
  6. Believing in a cosmic consciousness, I have no problem with thinking that the ancient shaman were in contact with the same entity that I found. Why rely on animal guides when human ones sre available? Animals, while intelligent, are not particularly bright. Man is. The God they found though is not of the same description as what I found. I think that the ancients, in their ignorance, added on way too many imaginary attributes. Regards DL
  7. Thanks for the laugh. Regards DL We should all step up to our own blame. As to their free will choice, if that is what it was, after all, it was done from a position of lack of full disclosure by God and new information from the talking snake that was true. Let us say that it was a free choice. They could not have known it was an evil choice because they had no clue as to what good and evil were. If they did not have evil intent then it is not just to punish them. Secular law calls that mens rea, Latin for evil mind or intent. Without that evil intent, the courts will not punish. Neither would a just God. Regards DL
  8. Two sides to one story. Yes. Perhaps if you focused on the side that has done much damage to society, in terms of giving us all an original sin guilt trip, not giving woman equality, and the ongoing discrimination of Gays. All based on the Christian interpretation. I will stick to the Jewish, civilized way. As God intended. Regards DL
  9. As a Gnostic Christian, I do not sympathy’s When you return to the real world and stop trying to profit from the murder of an innocent man, by his father, you might see in your own bible just what God has to say about blood sacrifices. Regards DL Sure. With anything desirable. God though that the murder of Jesus was desirable.Regards DL Then you might agree with the Jewish version where Eden is our elevation and not our fall. Christians did not usurp the Jewish interpretation when they usurped the Jewish God. They, reversed it for the $$$$$$$$$$$. Regards DL
  10. I do not know of any scientist who would make such a definitive statement without proof and at the same time, fall for a logical fallacy. It is impossible to show that man is without a soul. Just like it is impossible to prove that there is no God What makes you think that the lower consciousness would be discernable under the consciousness of mankind. I would think that, if there, we just match what would be there and could not discern it as a lower form. Don’t get me wrong. Neither one of us can know the answer to this one. While in apotheosis. I did not discern a lower consciousness than man’s. Regards DL
  11. Thanks. An all forgiving God would, by definition, never punish. I know of no God but mine that does not have the carrot and stick. Because it is out dated and doing damage. To women, Gays and generally being divisive to society. Further, how else to engage a thumper without thumping on his door? Of course. What should our God look like if not a man? http://imgur.com/3C7G1 Who do you think our first God was if not a man? In the real world. Who but a man can put words to God’s will? That is all I need. As a Gnostic Christian, I can be ahead of their thinking. Believers will believe what they will. I just show that O T God is immoral and that N T God is rhetorical garbage. The duality that you find in scripture is there for a reason. Two creation stories, two flood myths etc. The reason is to tell you that the authors did not know what truth was. If they did, they would not have bothered writing lies. It is not to be read literally. i got into a fight last week, well it was forced on me somewhat but i could have ran in retrospect, he went for me like a pitbull but i got a good punch in and put him down, i could tell he was partially intoxicated, his friend starting shouting "do it bro dont take that", the next thing i know he had a 7" butterfly knife in his hand and was approaching rapidly, without a conscious thought he was on his back with blood pouring down the nearest drain pipe, i tried to run but got knocked over by a car with extreme pressure. this is all i remember. when i went to heaven god said to me "ahhh, alas, here he is, how was hell?" i replied rather shocked "it was awful, from the moment of birth i was forced to have thought, yet the choice too kill didnt feel like mine, how can i be in heaven?" god replied to me with a smile "heaven was never a test, just a safe house for your deepest thoughts, now back to hell with you boy and be more careful what you think this time" moral of the story? heaven and hell are what you make of them...... I agree with you that hell is not supposed to be a good place. That is one of my points. God used it going against scripture. God was overcome by evil. Regards DL
  12. It blow hell out of your omni everything. Exactly. If we receive our moral sense from God, then it is in the image of his, we can thus judge his. If all of his actions are moral and we as you say have the same moral sense, then all our actions must be moral as well. Does your moral sense tell you that genocide is good or evil? Regards DL I spoke to his morals. Not him. Regards DL
  13. Genesis 6:6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. HOW does an omnipotent being suddenly regret anything he had ever done? Is he not supposed to be perfect and all knowing? You can con yourself into being less than you can be but God definitely said that A & E had his moral sense and thast means we can jusdge that genocidal A hole. You have judged him good with your foolish morals so let's keep a level playing field where I can do as you do and judge. Regards DL
  14. As above so below. A & E became as Gods. God's own words, so your vastly different, does not agree with God's own words. We are in his mental image. Wouls you vote for a law maker who you know will ignore his own laws? If so, remain blind. Regards DL A figment of the imagination. A catch all word for human hopes and dreams. Regards DL All do as I say and not as I do eh? A good law for a tyrant. Your statement is a lie. Go get the quote. Regards DL
  15. Does God accept bribes, ransoms, indulgences and sacrifice of Jesus? Eze 18 20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. Psa 49 7 None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him: Man has worked hard to try to put in place a system of justice where the guilty pay for their crimes/sin and the innocent go free. This actually seems to follow the scriptures above and if you are doing unto others what you would like done to you, then you will applaud our present legal forms. God on the other hand, and those theists that want to ride their scapegoat Jesus as a sacrifice for their sins and not step up to their responsibilities, seem to prefer to have the innocent punished and let the guilty walk. Scripture says that God cannot be bribed and will not accept a ransom of an innocent party to redeem another. Yet that is exactly what God is said to have done when he intentionally had his son murdered. Some call it a sacrifice. God wanting or needing a blood sacrifice also goes completely against scriptures but he and his followers don‘t seem to know that. The other bribes or ransoms that God seems to accept are indulgences given by the church and were ironically what created the reformation movement and sects that now somehow embrace that immoral notion. Martin Luther must be spinning in his grave. I will grant that that practice is not as widespread as it once was, but to me, the idea that a man can sin against another man, and by just placing a few $$$ in a church strong box without even having to seek forgiveness from his victim, and expect with church guarantee a shorter stay in purgatory, is just too immoral for me. All these bribes, ransoms and indulgences are for the forgiveness of sins. His murder or sacrifice of his son is for the same reason and also has the innocent being punished while the guilty go free. As the great law maker and executor of justice, do you think it moral for God to accept and demand such instead of making the guilty pay and letting the innocent live? Secular law generally follows the bible’s idea of justice, in many cases, as shown in the verses above. Should secular law reverse itself and follow God’s ideas of justice instead in accepting bribes, ransoms and sacrifices of innocent men? Regards DL
  16. Yes. I think we have evolved a soul. I also hold a firm belief in a cosmic consciousness that evolve from the first true human. This cosmic consciousness has no choice but to accept all of us our souls, after death, but does have a choice in accepting some before death if the conditions are right. A quick visit, so to speak. Like all apotheosis or things of the spiritua realm, I have no proof to offer. Regards DL
  17. So hell is a tool of fear mongering and infinite torture without purpose for the victim, but a good lesson for potential sinners. What a pathetic view. Especially when you have God not following his own WORD of not using evil against evil. Regards DL
  18. I'm waiting for the other shoe. Or will you just let that hang without an explanation, which of course make it a useless statemnent? Debate training is free. Learn. Regards D:
  19. I agree that punishment is given to deter crimes or sins bit it is hard to see who the sinner will sin against after he is dead. That would be deterrent enough would it not? Further, punishment is given to change attitudes and thus prevent reoccurrence but removing the source of the inclination. If that does not happen then the torture is pointless. Right? Would killing that soul be the more moral thing to do then? Regards DL
  20. A and E could not know love without eating of the TOK. There are many discussions centered around the story of Eden regardless of whether you read it literally, as allegory, figurative or myth. Some believe that Satan lied, some that God lied. Some see it as man’s fall while others, the Orthodox Jews who wrote the O T, see it as man’s elevation. Some think becoming as Gods is good, Jews, some not. Christians. Some give A & E free will yet the first time it is used, God punished them. A & E are supposed to be autonomous yet cannot know they are without doing their will instead of the will of God. Some see the punishments and original sin given as unjust and unbiblical. Some point to the fact that disobedience to God deserves anything God wants to do too them as well as all their descendents. Again contradicted by scripture. Some think that to become as Gods with a moral sense is worth any punishment or hardship. The terms used in Eden are always in dispute. What did God mean with, you shall surely die? A death innocence, there eyes were opened? Or a physical death that is passed on to all men? Who or what was the serpent or what does he represent? In other words, in 2000 years of debate, Eden and a fall or elevation, has not moved to any accepted conclusions. That is why I would like to focus on the issue of love and what Eden would be like if A & E had not eaten of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. A & E could not know love as it is good and they had no knowledge of good. Perhaps by entering the story from this angle, some progress might actually be gained. Certainly none has been gained by any other means. The oldest tradition started with Eden as our elevation from ignorance to having a moral sense. http://www.mrrena.com/misc/judaism2.php Christianity later usurped the Jewish scriptures, embraced them as a part of the bible, and promptly turned the moral of the story from what the Jews had in place, to the fall of man. Blamed for bringing death to the earth and cursed with original sin. A guilt trip that all were to share. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Man Where Jews empowered man, the Christians as Bishop Spong says, went into the guilt producing business. Now, on to speaking of love. I see Eden, before our elevation or fall, depending on your POV, as resembling this clip that shows, in a good analogy, what Eden may have been like. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wv7J9LtT95w&feature=related You have seen that love certainly was not about in that clip and without it, people would not care for each other. I contend therefore that in Eden, if A & E had not gained a moral sense, thus enabling them to know love as something good, life for man would not be worth living. The Jewish interpretation the gain of love as a huge plus while Christianity would shun this virtue and instead opt for blind obedience as the more valuable virtue. They chose to make slavery a virtue, instead the notion of rebellion against tyranny. You may have noted that nowhere in scripture is slavery condemned. In fact Paul teaches just how to beat your slaves. Nowhere in scripture is woman given equality because Eve was made from Adam’s rib and is declare to be the head of woman. This is also contrasted by the opposing view that the Jews had of Lilith, Adams first mate who is given, or better said, takes full equality. The Christian Eden began devoid of love. When A & E gained the ability to love, through the gain of knowledge and wisdom, God shoes clearly that there is no love in his heart and that he is a jealous God who is culpable for allowing death to enter the world by locking away the tree of life. That same tree which he had already told A & E they could eat from, thus in effect, killing them. Some would say murdering them. What would you do if you were Adam or Eve? Create the conditions where love nor death could be found on earth and live as in that clip of The Time Machine, or would you follow Eve and choose knowledge and wisdom and become as Gods, God’s words, and disobey a command that you could not know, without first eating of the tree of knowledge, that that would be an evil act? Whose interpretation of Eden do you think makes more sense and is better for mankind? The Jewish interpretation of man’s elevation, or the Christian one of the fall and promotion of blind obedience? Regards DL P S. Which tune do you like. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVbLNPwi_r0 Or.
  21. If omnipotent, having infinite pursuasive powers, then he would not need a hell at all would he?If God will not act in an omnipotent way, why should we even think he is omnipotent. Just another attribute we give our imaginary construct. Regards DL Yes. Regards DL The only place that we know of for sure where man can survive and you call it a suchy place. Start sucking. Regards DL
  22. Is hell a good place? We cannot know how the first iniquity demonstrated itself but we can know that rebellion begins with questioning the status quo. The moment God was questioned in any way, he responded with an evil punishment. Evil as I class it in any case. He does not tolerate anyone doing their will, if it does not comply with his will. Obey or else. Not quite what scriptures say he should be doing. Romans 12:21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. It would seem that God let himself be overcome by evil and responded with evil. Or evil must be good. God created the first division in his once united kingdom. It appears that God does not follow his own good advise. Or does he? If God was following his WORD, then hell must be a good place somehow. Strange but true. Are their any theists who would like to show how this is not back sliding? That is of course, a rhetorical question as back sliding cannot be denied. Was God overcome by evil? Did God follow his literal WORD or not? Should we? Is hell a good place or is Gods WORD worthless since he himself ignores them and breaks his own laws? Regards DL
  23. od God did not disallow the eating of the tree of life before A E ate of the tree of knowledge. In effect, he directly caused them to die and is thus guilty of murder IMO. Regards DL
  24. Strange that you can take your quote literally and trash mine for doing the same as you. Quite the level playing field. As to the rest of your psychoanalysis, preaching and thinking that I hate a God I do not believe in. Garbage. Regards DL
  25. It is my view that all literalists and fundamentals hurt all of us who are Religionists. They all hurt their parent religions and everyone else who has a belief. They make us all into laughing stocks and should rethink their position. There is a Godhead but not the God of talking animals, genocidal floods and retribution. Belief in fantasy is evil. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HKHaClUCw4&feature=PlayList&p=5123864A5243470E&index=0&playnext=1 They also do much harm to their own. African witches and Jesus http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlRG9gXriVI&feature=related Jesus Camp 1of 9 Promoting death to Gays. For evil to grow my friends, all good people need do is nothing. Fight them when you can. All of the above are basically cause by belief in fantasy, miracles, magic and witches. If you do not see it, I can break it down further for you. Regards DL
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.