nPeace
Veteran Member
You can't use a fairy tale to prove something to be a tale. So you are not correct.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why Believe Jesus Never Had Sex?
- Thread starter Sunstone
- Start date
ecco
Veteran Member
Above is your original argument. There are several things wrong with it. One is that you conflate any and all extramarital sex with the word promiscuity. If nothing else, you surely know that there are people who live as couples for years and only have sex with one another. So right off the bat you show that either you don't even know the meaning of the word "promiscuity" or you are engaging in hyperbole. This is obvious and self evident.
As to your latest and more reasoned comment...
OK, I agree. Are you happy now? You got the big bad atheist to see the light.
I freely admit that I have a very strong bias.
I have a very strong bias against people who make outrageous BS comments.
I have a very strong bias against people who intentionally misuse words.
But I don't think that my bias is rare in forums. I see many others calling out BS. I think that's a good thing.
Bob the Unbeliever
Well-Known Member
If god refuses to do anything about satan, then satan is simply god's agent: meaning everything satan does, god is fine with-- in fact, god approves of.
Or? God is so weak, he is unable to halt anything satan does, thus satan is stronger.
(Or neither exist in the first place, of course)
There is no scenario where satan is real, that leaves room for god to be GOOD.
Bob the Unbeliever
Well-Known Member
100% false on your part: Science has studied human DNA. Definitively, humans never came from a single breeding pair.
That proves without any doubt, that neither the Eden Story, nor the Noah Flood were real. Neither one happened.
If the fundamental requirement of Inherited Sin is wiped out because the story is false?
All of christianity is wiped out too: there never was a need for Jesus to die in the first place...
oooops!
Bob the Unbeliever
Well-Known Member
Not true: They have to justify doing what they do somehow-- so even if they do not overtly claim to "speak for god"? They DO claim Authority From God, simply by placing themselves in the position to "minister" over other humans.
The fact that so many are abusive? Proves definitively that there simply isn't any god who gives a fart in a septic tank about ANY of it!
See above.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Our authority comes from the church who ordains us. We don’t “minister over” other people. We “minister to” other people. It’s a servant role, not an authority role.
nPeace
Veteran Member
Correction. Scientist - not science - Scientists has studied human DNA... and applied what they learned to a hypothesis - an idea, which cannot be proven to be true.
So you have proved nothing but your faith.
Your non-belief.
sealchan
Well-Known Member
Agreed. You can't create the Universe, threaten the destruction of all sentient beings and allow Satan to wander around to muck it up if you are wanting to be thought of as only Good. There must be a higher sense of the meaning of what is Good than the plain, rational one...but such a thought strains the credulity of many a rational thinker.
But there is a context for understanding at a higher level to our rational one and it too, ironically, is based on a rational system. Rational truth cannot be understood simply as the set of all rational theorems individually proven by repeatable experience...it must also be understood that these rational theorems describe behaviors in reality only partially and that there reproducibility is within certain boundaries.
I think that this higher truth, this "systemic" truth, where rational behaviors interconnected in a web of impact and influence, can take just about any scientific truth or moral truth and produce a contradictory outcome when those boundaries are breached. Sure the law and order of our mundane reality keeps us in those boundaries most of the time. But on a regular basis people seem to need to escape those boundaries and to do so they need to understand what is right or good beyond what is rationally definable.
Back in the day of early Christianity I think that Jesus was seen as an utter revolution. Today we have adopted many of the teachings of Jesus as a matter of course. Now we can see more clearly where there are some gaps in the understanding of the New Testament authors. But I think that the New Testament speaks as much to today's moral reality as it does to an attitude toward how to transcend any day's rational morality.
When I invoke the figure of Satan I typically do so in the context of personifying how we can fool ourselves with an unswerving alignment to the understanding of our deeply held rational rules for what is good. But always these rules, taken too literally, can lead to a feedback loop that will undo the good that such rules were meant to ensure. All is in a balance.
No understanding of what is good or what is true is "an island". Each understanding is embedded in assumptions of what else is true such that these other assumptions tell us instinctively whether a single rule or truth is true or not. Taking the time to unravel these interdependencies leads to humility and a wonder at whether that higher level of understanding is attainable by humanity and whether it will "come to be" as a reality in this Universe. But as we look back toward the Big Bang we can also be awed at how the Universe appears to grow and evolve like an ever-opening flower into what can, with infinitely more complexity, look back at itself and see the history of its own becoming.
nPeace
Veteran Member
What you say there makes sense. Is this the first time we agree on something?
So if God has not refused to do something about Satan, then Satan is not God's agent, and God is not weak if he makes progress against Satan. Can we agree on that?
Steps revealed
1 - Genesis 3:15
2 - Luke 10:17-19
3 - Romans 16:20
4 - Hebrews 2:14
5 - 1 John 3:8
Actions taken
1. Revelation 12:7-12 Success
2 - Revelation 20:1-3 Soon to be carried out
3 - Revelation 20:7-10 To be completed in the far future
God has not refused to do something about Satan. He has acted against him, and doesn't require us puny two legged creatures - myself included, with such little knowledge to tell him how or when to do his job. He know better than we do, and unlike us weaklings - myself included, he is able.
Can we agree on that?
Yeah, nPeace. When pigs fly.
Bob the Unbeliever
Well-Known Member
"over", "to": po-tay-toe, po-tah-toe. I don't see a functional difference.
And the church claims to speak for god. Putting it at one remove doesn't excuse nor explain my criticisms, it actually makes it worse: what sort of god would permit such massively organized institutions to behave so... abominably, so often? (or even once .... being a deity, it would easily recognize an impending disaster, and could take seemingly minor steps to prevent the disasters in the first place... )
Bob the Unbeliever
Well-Known Member
100% false. Unlike you? I have studied the evidence and conclusions.
The DNA is quite clear, and the evidence is quite strong-- infinitely stronger than yours-- mainly because you don't have any evidence at all.
So you have proved nothing but your faith.
Projection. I have no need of faith: I have FACTS. In contrast to you, who have none.
nPeace
Veteran Member
Okay. The strong do not have the battle.
We'll see which is stronger... eventually.
Bob the Unbeliever
Well-Known Member
that's all very interesting, in a very abstract way.
But.
It absolutely fails to address my point:
IF satan is real? THEN satan is either:
1) An Agent of god (and everything satan does is therefore with permission and approval of god -- meaning god is as evil as satan.
2) Stronger than god-- because god is powerless to stop satan.
Which is it? You can spin this all day long, but condensing the essence down leaves it as above.
Bob the Unbeliever
Well-Known Member
Niiiiiccceee.... out come the implied threats that your Sky Daddy will torture me forever if I don't back down.
LOL!
Bob the Unbeliever
Well-Known Member
What you say there makes sense. Is this the first time we agree on something?
So if God has not refused to do something about Satan, then Satan is not God's agent, and God is not weak if he makes progress against Satan. Can we agree on that?
No. Deliberately and with Malice, refusing to stop satan COLD from the BEGINNING?
Is the ONLY possible thing that a GOOD god could do.
"taking steps" means
1) god is too weak to stop satan COLD, and has to muddle along with ... grossly ineffective "steps"
2) god is deliberately and with malice GOOFING AROUND, and taking his sweet time-- allowing INCREDIBLE SUFFERING. NOT GOOD.
----------
Either way you take it? God is either WEAK or EVIL. Note: could be both.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
I recognize your ire; I don’t understand it. You should understand my position as clergy. I’m not going to join this issue with you in the interest of fostering amity. We agree on many issues; you seem reasonable. Let’s not “go there,” shall we?
nPeace
Veteran Member
Oh now you are really stretching your ideas. Be careful they don't strangle you as you stretch them as long as possible.
You should write you own book, and then critique it.
1robin
Christian/Baptist
Sorry. I am very busy at the moment. I will not have time to continue our discussion.
ecco
Veteran Member
The same can be and is said of: Mohammed, Bahá’u’lláh, Joseph Smith, L. Ron Hubbard, David Koresh to name just a few. What point are you trying to make?
What teachings have we adopted that were not around long before Jesus?
ecco
Veteran Member
AKA The argument of last resort.