|
On February 17 2009 16:45 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2009 16:44 BanZu wrote:On February 17 2009 16:42 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:On February 17 2009 16:41 BanZu wrote:On February 17 2009 16:40 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:On February 17 2009 16:39 BanZu wrote:On February 17 2009 16:37 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:On February 17 2009 16:36 BanZu wrote:On February 17 2009 16:23 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:On February 17 2009 16:21 BanZu wrote:
[quote]
How does this "random good fortune" at the expense of others? Does my belief in God force others to go to hell? Does my ceasing of this belief save others from hell?
I can't say anything about the topic of people being saved as being random and a fortune, because frankly I don't know how God intends on carrying out judgment. However, instead of whining and complaining about things being unfair, why not go out and preach the gospel?
Also, would you say that those who reject your words and being at a misfortune? Is it not their choice? im not talking about the ones with a choice, im talking about the ones never exposed to the choice. they go to hell for no reason other than misfortune. my salvation wouldn't be at the direct expense of others, but it'd be spitting in the face of the ones who go to hell for no reason. the fact that these people exist proves that christianity is inherently unfair. preaching the gospel may even the odds slightly, but there shouldn't have been innocent casualties in the first place. Let's say everyone in the world contracts a fatal disease that slowly kills off the victim, and all-the-while the victim is unaware. I come to you with an antidote and tell you that if you took it everyday you wouldn't die from this disease. There are two possible reactions. 1. You say that I'm stupid, ignorant, and delusional and call me a liar. 2. You take my word as truth, take the antidote, and live forever. Now, let's say that you took the first route. Does it sound right in this case for you to call me a liar? Probably, because you want solid evidence showing what I have told you. Does it sound right in this case for you to say that I'm condemning you to death? That I'm unfair in saying that you will die from this disease? No. Your post and views are ridiculous if you just take a look at this analogy. IM TALKING ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO ARENT OFFERED THE ANTIDOTE if you think every single person would be offered this antidote, you are delusional Wow, read it again. You're condemning me for what the DISEASE is doing now. but you, being jesus/god, created the disease. you created everything. you're an asshole. Did God create sin? god created everything So you're saying God thought something along the lines of "yay let's give everyone a disease that kills them and forces me to do even more stuff to save them!" it's what genesis and a whooooooole bunch of christians say if you beg to differ, feel free to found your own denomination of christianity you can call it "Church of the God that's our Friend that helps Combat the Evil that Came Out of Nowhere" i mean most christians say evil came from the fact that god gave humans free will, but you're saying god is helping humans against evil that came from ???
if you care to show me some references that show this, please do.
I've always thought that God originally intended for man to take God as his life, hence the Tree of Life. Nothing more. However, Satan entered the picture and here we are.
|
On February 17 2009 16:47 BanZu wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2009 16:45 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:On February 17 2009 16:44 BanZu wrote:On February 17 2009 16:42 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:On February 17 2009 16:41 BanZu wrote:On February 17 2009 16:40 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:On February 17 2009 16:39 BanZu wrote:On February 17 2009 16:37 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:On February 17 2009 16:36 BanZu wrote:On February 17 2009 16:23 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:
[quote]
im not talking about the ones with a choice, im talking about the ones never exposed to the choice. they go to hell for no reason other than misfortune. my salvation wouldn't be at the direct expense of others, but it'd be spitting in the face of the ones who go to hell for no reason. the fact that these people exist proves that christianity is inherently unfair. preaching the gospel may even the odds slightly, but there shouldn't have been innocent casualties in the first place. Let's say everyone in the world contracts a fatal disease that slowly kills off the victim, and all-the-while the victim is unaware. I come to you with an antidote and tell you that if you took it everyday you wouldn't die from this disease. There are two possible reactions. 1. You say that I'm stupid, ignorant, and delusional and call me a liar. 2. You take my word as truth, take the antidote, and live forever. Now, let's say that you took the first route. Does it sound right in this case for you to call me a liar? Probably, because you want solid evidence showing what I have told you. Does it sound right in this case for you to say that I'm condemning you to death? That I'm unfair in saying that you will die from this disease? No. Your post and views are ridiculous if you just take a look at this analogy. IM TALKING ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO ARENT OFFERED THE ANTIDOTE if you think every single person would be offered this antidote, you are delusional Wow, read it again. You're condemning me for what the DISEASE is doing now. but you, being jesus/god, created the disease. you created everything. you're an asshole. Did God create sin? god created everything So you're saying God thought something along the lines of "yay let's give everyone a disease that kills them and forces me to do even more stuff to save them!" it's what genesis and a whooooooole bunch of christians say if you beg to differ, feel free to found your own denomination of christianity you can call it "Church of the God that's our Friend that helps Combat the Evil that Came Out of Nowhere" i mean most christians say evil came from the fact that god gave humans free will, but you're saying god is helping humans against evil that came from ??? if you care to show me some references that show this, please do. I've always thought that God originally intended for man to take God as his life, hence the Tree of Life. Nothing more. However, Satan entered the picture and here we are.
didn't god create the angel that would eventually be the fallen angel satan?
or wait, by the genesis interpretation of the serpent being the devil...
didnt god put him there?
![[image loading]](http://www.sinfest.net/comikaze/comics/2003-10-19.gif)
|
or are you preaching a christianity without an omnipotent god?
are we pawns in a battle between god and satan? i'm pretty sure that's not the most common type of christianity.
|
|
|
you are so not backho
your english is way too good
|
On February 17 2009 16:53 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:
or are you preaching a christianity without an omnipotent god?
are we pawns in a battle between god and satan? i'm pretty sure that's not the most common type of christianity.
I don't get why you would jump to such absurd conclusions other than to try and debase me.
Also, God may have created Lucifer/Satan but I wouldn't go as far as to say that God intentionally injected man with Satan's sinful nature.
I've noticed that people opposing Christians like to use devious and tricky means to try and boost their position. It'd be a lot better if you didn't fall into this category because honestly, continuing this talk is difficult when I have to explain every single little thing.
|
On February 17 2009 17:08 BanZu wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2009 16:53 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:
or are you preaching a christianity without an omnipotent god?
are we pawns in a battle between god and satan? i'm pretty sure that's not the most common type of christianity. I don't get why you would jump to such absurd conclusions other than to try and debase me. Also, God may have created Lucifer/Satan but I wouldn't go as far as to say that God intentionally injected man with Satan's sinful nature. I've noticed that people opposing Christians like to use devious and tricky means to try and boost their position. It'd be a lot better if you didn't fall into this category because honestly, continuing this talk is difficult when I have to explain every single little thing.
i'm being 100% serious. omnipotence is precluded by omniscience, so by its very definition, there's no way that god could create satan without knowing the risks and conclusion. is god truly omnipotent or not? you can't have it both ways.
edit: i've found a counter to my own argument http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omniscience#Definition
but honestly, you're being more of a jerk than i am in this argument if you call my conclusions absurd and call my argument "devious and tricky"
how was i supposed to know that god didn't have to be truly omniscient to be omnipotent? seriously... that distinction is pretty obscure.
it still leaves the question of why/how god could create characters that could act in evil manners? even if he weren't omniscient, omnipotence would mean he knew the nature of what he was creating, minus what it would do with its free will, wouldnt it? was he blindfolding himself and throwing darts at a dartboard when creating the first beings?
edit2: i have to finish my japanese homework and go to sleep, so i won't be able to post for maybe 20 hours? i'll be back though
|
On February 17 2009 17:11 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2009 17:08 BanZu wrote:On February 17 2009 16:53 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:
or are you preaching a christianity without an omnipotent god?
are we pawns in a battle between god and satan? i'm pretty sure that's not the most common type of christianity. I don't get why you would jump to such absurd conclusions other than to try and debase me. Also, God may have created Lucifer/Satan but I wouldn't go as far as to say that God intentionally injected man with Satan's sinful nature. I've noticed that people opposing Christians like to use devious and tricky means to try and boost their position. It'd be a lot better if you didn't fall into this category because honestly, continuing this talk is difficult when I have to explain every single little thing. i'm being 100% serious. omnipotence is precluded by omniscience, so by its very definition, there's no way that god could create satan without knowing the risks and conclusion. is god truly omnipotent or not? you can't have it both ways. edit: i've found a counter to my own argument http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omniscience#Definitionbut honestly, you're being more of a jerk than i am in this argument if you call my conclusions absurd and call my argument "devious and tricky" how was i supposed to know that god didn't have to be truly omniscient to be omnipotent? seriously... that distinction is pretty obscure. edit2: i have to finish my japanese homework and go to sleep, so i won't be able to post for maybe 20 hours? i'll be back though
Sorry if I offended you. I wasn't aware of that.
|
Imagine a boy is born in some far off country. From birth he is a moral and decent person. He embraces goodwill, fairness and altruism. He honors his family and adopts their customs. He becomes a leader in his church and community as a force for good, organizing programs that aide the poor, needy and less fortunate. He attends school and becomes well-learned and open-minded. He becomes a doctor and, over the course of his career, saves thousands of lives. When he is old enough to retire, he keeps only what he needs to live on, and donates the rest to charities. When he is 80, he is approached by a strangely-dressed man from another community. The man tells him of Christianity, and its core belief system in embracing Jesus Christ as the gateway to heaven. Our young boy, now an old man, gives a donation to the traveling missionary and wishes him and his people good tidings, but expresses his own community, religion and customs have been kind to him, that although he denounces no faith, he wishes his sons and daughters to grow up in his community, sharing his morals of goodwill and altruism. Finally, after 100 years of service to his friends, family and community, a career of saving lives, and a history of true empathy and virtue, this man dies. Because he did not embrace Jesus Christ, he is sentenced to eternal damnation.
This is how God seems 'unfair' to many, myself included.
To the OP:
Spirituality isn't something you decide to pick one day. Travel and experience different cultures, read philosophies from all viewpoints, find what makes you happy and what you love. Spirituality never stops growing; you will find more that you believe and more that you reject the more that you live your life. Never limit yourself to somebody else's morals or ethics. Focus your life on what you believe, from your own personal experience. Religious structures are unique and independent to every person. Lacking spirituality at the moment does not mean it's time to jump into organized religion, it means its time to explore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On February 17 2009 20:18 Mada_Jiang wrote:
Hi Heaven Panda
I once thought the exact same thing, because around me was people who FEARED God because all that was ever taught to them was how bad they are and how they are going to go to hell for not accepting Jesus. Having gotten to know God and really spent time with him, I came to realise the truth. And that is, God is not "sentencing" ANYONE to eternal damnation. God created us just as parents have children. Who the hell would want their children to be eternally damned? God loves us so much that he is urging us, to take his hand, so that we can be with him. What people call "damnation" really is just seperation from God.
God wants all his children to be with him, but if you choose not to you, then you are don't have to be. And if you are not with him, then you can't protect you from whatever else may be there waiting for us. I don't know about you but if my child seperated from me and was mistreated by others, I would be beyond sad. Our God feels deep pain every time one of his children decides to be away from him, deny him, and pretend he dosn't even exist.
BTW, we do NOT know who embraces Jesus Christ, after death. I believe that God is a loving God and gives us more opportunitie(s) even after death and I believe that those who you call "condemned" are only those who are dead set at choosing to be seperate from God and refuse his help and I dunno who would but I would imagine that they would at least have to hate God pretty hard... someone who is going to curse God even at that point.
how exactly did you get to know god and spend time with him
|
Hi BackHo, you really are THE BackHo it is an honour ^.^
oh nevermind i get it now
|
|
|
ill dedicate the win to you if you stop basing your life around hallucinations
|
|
|
actually you can see heat
im just messing though i agree with what you are saying
|
United Kingdom391 Posts
Ok just 2 quick answers:
1) Gnosticism was heavily rejected even in the epistles of john and paul before it took off and was utterly rejected by the early church so Gnosticism became it's own little cult outside of the church. So no it was not mainstream Christianity at any time.
Basically the reason in the letters or gospel by John where he keeps refering to Light all the time was a direct rebuke to the gnostics who we're absolutely facinated by this idea that God was hidden away somewhere and was bad, but what John and others we're saying was no, God has revealed himself, God is good and God is the saviour.
2) As for spirit tuna, just forget it man your the one who is cannot reason and your religious zeal for physics far extends mine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
