Does God Love Humans

[It Aint Necessarily So]

You think it's unacceptable that God allows murder?

Yes.

God doesn't simply watch and say "When you're done I'm going to punish you". God is the victim

God is the victim? No, the raped child is.

Why wouldn't you want a will that tells you and others to do good things?

I think I just told you that I would want that.

If you and others are incapable of making bad decisions then that is not free will, that is personality control, and that is in violation of the purpose of the universe to exist.

If one goes by Christian doctrine, the universe exists as an audition to discover who is willing to believe and praise a god based on bad evidence, with those not willing to believe on that bad evidence cast into a lake of fire to suffer eternally. I find that selfish and immoral.

Things were supposed to be different. The angels were supposed to institute a breeding program in primitive humans that would have removed psychopathic and other bad genes from us but Lucifer rebelled and things did not go as planned. That's on the angels, not God. God does not interfere.

Not too much turned out as God had hoped it would, did it?

Souls don't burn forever. There are two options, heaven or you cease to exist.

Not according to the Bible.

 

[Super Universe]

Yes.



God is the victim? No, the raped child is.



I think I just told you that I would want that.



If one goes by Christian doctrine, the universe exists as an audition to discover who is willing to believe and praise a god based on bad evidence, with those not willing to believe on that bad evidence cast into a lake of fire to suffer eternally. I find that selfish and immoral.



Not too much turned out as God had hoped it would, did it?



Not according to the Bible.

A raped child is the victim, not God? But that raped child is God. Each one of us is God in a unique personality, we just don't remember because if we did that would greatly change the way we act. There would be no free will if we all knew we were God and that there was nothing to be afraid of and we would all know everything and there would be no wonder or new experiences. And there would be no reason for the universe to exist.

You want this and you want that? It's not about you. It never was about you and it's never going to be about you.

If one goes by the Christian doctrine? There are many doctrines. Some are set in their ancient and primitive ways, others (science) change over time. No one has all the answers.

You don't like fire and brimstone Christianity? Humans are messy beings. Humans don't like it when others believe different things. It challenges your judgement and you don't like that so what humans do is try to scare others to force them into believing the same things. Humans would even burn them at the stake for saying things they disagreed with. To you it's all God's fault because if it's not then you are responsible for the things you've done but, of course, nothing can really ever be your fault, could it?

Not too much turned out as God hoped it would? When God "hopes" that thing happens. God did not hope for humans to do this or that. You're not nearly that important. You just think you are. You do know that the earth is not the center of the universe anymore, right?

The bible says that souls burn forever? The bible is not in charge of the universe.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Then there would be no free will

That's the present position of many philosophers and neuroscientists.

... and thus no purpose for having a universe.

That's the present position of many philosophers and cosmologists.

There is no free will in Christianity

That's not what Christians tell me.

Dogs can be happy, but they don't have free will and self-awareness

My dogs are very self-aware, and I have no reason to think that their wills are any more or less free than yours.

And eternal damnation is the vision of some power mongers looking to quench an unquenchable sadistic thirst.

Yet it is Christian doctrine.

Why would God and the heavenly host want to listen to or know about all that suffering for eternity/

Many Christians seem to be looking forward to it. Why would they think that the god who ordered it isn't enjoying it also? Here it is from the horse's mouth:

Spoiler: jeers in heaven

JEERS IN HEAVEN

• "In order that the happiness of the saints may be more delightful to them and that they may render more copious thanks to God for it, they are allowed to see perfectly the sufferings of the damned ... So that they may be urged the more to praise God ... The saints in heaven know distinctly all that happens ... to the damned" - Thomas Aquinas

Apparently, the Christian god and the angels will be rejoicing at the suffering of souls in hell:

• "The door of mercy will be shut and all bowels of compassion denied, by God, who will laugh at their destruction; by angels and saints, who will rejoice when they see the vengeance' by their fellow-suffer the devil and the damned rejoicing over their misery." - Bishop Newcomb

Delighting in the suffering of others is part of the happiness of heaven:

• This display of the divine character will be most entertaining to all who love God, will give them the highest and most ineffable pleasure. Should the fire of this eternal punishment cease, it would in a great measure obscure the light of heaven, and put an end to a great part of the happiness and glory of the blessed." - Samuel Hopkins

Does this seem confusing? Maybe this will help:

• "Non-Christians often ask the Christian, "But how can the God of love allow any of his creatures to suffer unending misery?" The question is, how can he not? The fact that God is love makes hell necessary." - Christian Theology in Plain Language, p. 219

So don't worry if all of this seems a little horrible to you now. This famous preacher is letting you know how happy torture will make you as well once you have gone to heaven:

• "The view of the misery of the damned will double the ardor of the love and gratitude of the saints of heaven ... The sight of hell torments will exalt the happiness of the saints forever ... Can the believing father in Heaven be happy with his unbelieving children in Hell ... I tell you, yea! Such will be his sense of justice that it will increase rather than diminish his bliss." - Jonathan Edwards

This early church father is certainly planning on having a good time watching others suffer and even laughing at them:

• "At that greatest of all spectacles, that last and eternal judgment how shall I admire, how laugh, how rejoice, how exult, when I behold so many proud monarchs groaning in the lowest abyss of darkness; so many magistrates liquefying in fiercer flames than they ever kindled against the Christians; so many sages philosophers blushing in red-hot fires with their deluded pupils; so many tragedians more tuneful in the expression of their own sufferings; so many dancers tripping more nimbly from anguish then ever before from applause." - Tertullian

Does this include infants?

• "Reprobate infants are vipers of vengeance, which Jehovah will hold over hell, in the tongs of his wrath, till they turn and spit venom in his face!" - Jonathan Edwards

But what about your own children? This one from the Catholic Truth Society is as beautiful as a mother's love for her child:

• "What will it be like for a mother in heaven who sees her son burning in hell? She will glorify the justice of God." - Catholic Truth Society

One might ask just how all of these people in heaven laughing at the suffering of strangers, former friends, and even former loved ones that didn't make it would make them any different different from Satan and the demons below, who presumably will be laughing along with them. Good question, don't you think?

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

That's the present position of many philosophers and neuroscientists.



That's the present position of many philosophers and cosmologists.



That's not what Christians tell me.



My dogs are very self-aware, and I have no reason to think that their wills are any more or less free than yours.



Yet it is Christian doctrine.



Many Christians seem to be looking forward to it. Why would they think that the god who ordered it isn't enjoying it also? Here it is from the horse's mouth:

I could answer those questions, but since you appear not to be taking this seriously, and that reasoned responses deserve nothing but patronizing quips, I hardly see the point.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

There would be no free will if we all knew we were God and that there was nothing to be afraid of and we would all know everything and there would be no wonder or new experiences. And there would be no reason for the universe to exist.

Yeah, I just got that. The universe doesn't conform to the superstitions of man.

You don't like fire and brimstone Christianity?

I have no use for Christianity or any religion. Fire and brimstone theology just makes Christianity worse. It is an ideology that promulgates many very bad ideas, the concept that one might be eternally tortured for not believing the unbelievable,and calling that perfect love, justice, and mercy being just one. It sees that Christians are beginning to understand what an immoral idea that is given how many are revising that doctrine. Such a god, if it existed, would be so immoral that man would be justified if he could subdue such a god, release the souls in anguish from hell, and toss the god in there instead to be eternally tortured itself for its willingness to do that to others.

And it would enjoy all of the same rights and mercy as it gave - none. No hope for parole or for the pain to end.

Do you disagree that that would be just?

To you it's all God's fault

You know that I don't believe in any god's right?

My opinions are about what Christianity teaches. It teaches that its god is omniscient and omnipotent. With these two would come omniresponsibility.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

you appear not to be taking this seriously, and that reasoned responses deserve nothing but patronizing quips

So, your position is that your claims about free will, the purpose of the universe, and sadism in heaven are reasoned, while contradictory opinions are patronizing and not serious?

I hardly see the point.

The point would be to defend your position against rebuttal. That's how these things usually proceed. I'm content to leave it where it is. I had nothing more to add. Apparently, neither do you.

 

[Super Universe]

Yeah, I just got that. The universe doesn't conform to the superstitions of man.



I have no use for Christianity or any religion. Fire and brimstone theology just makes Christianity worse. It is an ideology that promulgates many very bad ideas, the concept that one might be eternally tortured for not believing the unbelievable,and calling that perfect love, justice, and mercy being just one. It sees that Christians are beginning to understand what an immoral idea that is given how many are revising that doctrine. Such a god, if it existed, would be so immoral that man would be justified if he could subdue such a god, release the souls in anguish from hell, and toss the god in there instead to be eternally tortured itself for its willingness to do that to others.

And it would enjoy all of the same rights and mercy as it gave - none. No hope for parole or for the pain to end.

Do you disagree that that would be just?



You know that I don't believe in any god's right?

My opinions are about what Christianity teaches. It teaches that its god is omniscient and omnipotent. With these two would come omniresponsibility.

Fire and brimstone doesn't make Christianity worse, it's not Christianity at all. You can call a tree a car all you want but that does not make it so.

Early Christianity needed people to join with them to survive. They had to compete with Judaism, Roman belief's, and their neighboring countries belief's. Back then the people couldn't just accept that God was all good because they believed that God was very mischievous and very involved with humanity.

The problem with all religion is that people always think that a new idea is all there is coming. We really have a long ways to go and humans are very slow to change.

Do I disagree that punishing God would be unjust? I would have done things different but it's not God that is to blame. The angels were supposed to teach primitive humans and provide a better evolutionary progress for us but Lucifer rebelled and Jesus refused to immediately end the rebellion because He wanted to find out which angels were loyal and which ones were not. So, Jesus waited until every angel chose a side. Certain circuits were cut to isolate the earth. Then, something unforseen happened, souls in heaven preferred the separation from God that the human race provided. So, Jesus declared the earth off limits to angels except those in specific assignments. So, it is what it is.

You don't believe in any gods? Your belief is not required. You're not supposed to know.

Your opinions are about what Christianity teaches? If it teaches something that Jesus taught, then it's Christianity. If it teaches the Old Testament as if it's equal to what Christ taught, then it's not Christianity. If it teaches something that Jesus did NOT teach as if it's Christianity, then it's not Christianity.

God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omniresponsible? Correct, sort of. God knows everything that has happened but not everything that has not happened, but, to God, everything has happened already. So, let me try and explain this complicated concept, God, in His beginning, did not know what He did not know but He did know everything about everything that existed at that point. Time is shifted as you ascend towards heaven. The bible says that a thousand years in heaven is like a day on the earth. Once you enter heaven all time is the exact same moment, all past, all present, and all future is the same instant. Time no longer is a function of space/time, it's a series of events. Today, I saw this person before that person.

God is omnipotent? All powerful? Yes, but, once certain fundamental laws are created they control future actions. So, once you decide the value of something that controls it's future action. Meaning, if you say that 1 has a certain value and that 2 is two 1's, and that 3 is three 1's, then that sets in place combinations of those numbers and multiplication of those numbers. God does not make laws and then change them. Humans do that. When God makes a law it's forever and it's unbreakable.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Fire and brimstone doesn't make Christianity worse, it's not Christianity at all.

Sure it is. It's probably the best known aspect of Christianity.

it's not God that is to blame. The angels were supposed to ...

Omnipotence + omniscience = omniresponsibility, including responsibility for what the angels do and for what man does. That seems self-evident to me.

You haven't offered a counterargument as to why an omnipotent, omniscient God wouldn't be responsible for everything. You have merely denied it and moved on. Naturally, my position is unchanged.

If it teaches something that Jesus taught, then it's Christianity. If it teaches the Old Testament as if it's equal to what Christ taught, then it's not Christianity. If it teaches something that Jesus did NOT teach as if it's Christianity, then it's not Christianity.

To an unbeliever, Christianity is what Christians say and do. Does that conform to a book? Maybe, maybe not. It wouldn't matter regarding whether it was Christianity.

Incidentally, if Christianity is defined as conforming to the commandments of Jesus, there probably aren't five Christians in the world.

Matthew 6:19 says, "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal." How many people that call themselves Christians have no savings?

Luke 12:33 says, "Sell your possessions and give to the poor." How many Christians have no possessions - no home, no car, no wardrobe, no cell phone, etc..

 

[Super Universe]

Sure it is. It's probably the best known aspect of Christianity.



Omnipotence + omniscience = omniresponsibility, including responsibility for what the angels do and for what man does. That seems self-evident to me.

You haven't offered a counterargument as to why an omnipotent, omniscient God wouldn't be responsible for everything. You have merely denied it and moved on. Naturally, my position is unchanged.



To an unbeliever, Christianity is what Christians say and do. Does that conform to a book? Maybe, maybe not. It wouldn't matter regarding whether it was Christianity.

Incidentally, if Christianity is defined as conforming to the commandments of Jesus, there probably aren't five Christians in the world.

Matthew 6:19 says, "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal." How many people that call themselves Christians have no savings?

Luke 12:33 says, "Sell your possessions and give to the poor." How many Christians have no possessions - no home, no car, no wardrobe, no cell phone, etc..

Forgiveness is the best aspect of Christianity, and the Golden rule, and loving others as you love yourself. Some people who claim to be Christians like the idea of hell because they want those who believe differently to be punished. They think God gets angry because that's what the OT says but Jesus did not preach that so that is not Christianity.

You can attempt to blame God for everything, it's not going to change the universe in the slightest way. I know a young child who didn't get the Christmas present they wanted and threw a tantrum, it's all the same thing to the universe.

If Christianity is defined as... Everyone has their own definition of things. Websters has one, you have one, I have another. What I'm saying is that if someone says that something is Christian it has to be something that Jesus said. For example, the ten commandments is not something Jesus said, in fact it's something He preached against.

Matthew 6:19 "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth..." Means that your earthly life is temporary compared to living an eternity in heaven. It doesn't mean you shouldn't save your money for your future or your children's future, just don't get too stuck on earthly pursuits.

Luke 12:33 "Sell your possessions and give to the poor". Means that if you really believed in God and the idea of heaven you would live humbly and give money to help others and dedicate what time you could towards helping others. It doesn't mean that you should have nothing at all. Being rich means you are a money hoarder, in a system that has a limited money supply it basically means you are causing harm to those who are poor.

 

[idav]

Yeah, I just got that. The universe doesn't conform to the superstitions of man.



I have no use for Christianity or any religion. Fire and brimstone theology just makes Christianity worse. It is an ideology that promulgates many very bad ideas, the concept that one might be eternally tortured for not believing the unbelievable,and calling that perfect love, justice, and mercy being just one. It sees that Christians are beginning to understand what an immoral idea that is given how many are revising that doctrine. Such a god, if it existed, would be so immoral that man would be justified if he could subdue such a god, release the souls in anguish from hell, and toss the god in there instead to be eternally tortured itself for its willingness to do that to others.

And it would enjoy all of the same rights and mercy as it gave - none. No hope for parole or for the pain to end.

Do you disagree that that would be just?



You know that I don't believe in any god's right?

My opinions are about what Christianity teaches. It teaches that its god is omniscient and omnipotent. With these two would come omniresponsibility.

The bible does seem to paint God as sort of a war type god. That would have been a decent god type to include in the OP. That would be a person that thinks somehow God prefers certain tribes over other tribes, which to me sounds elitists. I don't think most people think that way but I wouldn't put it passed humans, they have been warring over holy desert for far too long, they get the most giant facepalm.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Forgiveness is the best aspect of Christianity, and the Golden rule, and loving others as you love yourself. Some people who claim to be Christians like the idea of hell because they want those who believe differently to be punished. They think God gets angry because that's what the OT says but Jesus did not preach that so that is not Christianity.

You can attempt to blame God for everything, it's not going to change the universe in the slightest way. I know a young child who didn't get the Christmas present they wanted and threw a tantrum, it's all the same thing to the universe.

If Christianity is defined as... Everyone has their own definition of things. Websters has one, you have one, I have another. What I'm saying is that if someone says that something is Christian it has to be something that Jesus said. For example, the ten commandments is not something Jesus said, in fact it's something He preached against.

Matthew 6:19 "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth..." Means that your earthly life is temporary compared to living an eternity in heaven. It doesn't mean you shouldn't save your money for your future or your children's future, just don't get too stuck on earthly pursuits.

Luke 12:33 "Sell your possessions and give to the poor". Means that if you really believed in God and the idea of heaven you would live humbly and give money to help others and dedicate what time you could towards helping others. It doesn't mean that you should have nothing at all. Being rich means you are a money hoarder, in a system that has a limited money supply it basically means you are causing harm to those who are poor.

Since I'm becoming more sensitive to drifting off topic, I'm choosing to hide my responses in such discussions in a spoiler so that only those interested in the digression will even see it:

Spoiler

Forgiveness is the best aspect of Christianity

My comment was about the best known aspect of Christianity. I don't know what I would call the best aspect of Christianity.

and the Golden rule, and loving others as you love yourself.

Humanists embody that better than Christians.

Consider the position that Christianity took in the same sex marriage battle. If we lived in a world where homosexuality was the dominant cultural norm and heterosexuality was considered an abomination, and you were a heterosexual man that wanted to marry a heterosexual woman, what would you want others to do for you - permit it, or staunchly oppose you? The Golden Rule says to treat others as you would have them treat you. Who did that in that cultural battle, the Christians or the humanists?

How about if men needed to take a fertilizing pill in order to impregnate their wives. Would it be more consistent with the Golden Rule to allow that choice, or for others to impose their ideological preferences on you by erecting barriers to you getting it? Who is taking which side regarding access to contraceptives?

I realize that these are biological absurdities, but that is irrelevant to my point. I just wanted to put you, who I assume is a straight male, in the place of the people being oppressed by Christians so that you could recognize what you would want and what you would expect from those claiming the Golden Rule as a guiding principle.

You can attempt to blame God for everything

I don't blame God for anything. I'm an atheist.

What I said was that an omniscient, omnipotent agent is also omniresponsible. I haven't see that comment rebutted, just more claims that this or that isn't God's fault - it's the fault of Satan or sinful man. Does such a god not have the power to reign in this demon or correct man's nature? It does if it's omnipotent. And if it chooses not to do so, it is responsible for that choice.

If you or anybody else wants to make a counterargument that addresses that specific point rather than just glossing past it and repeating that God is blameless, I would be happy to field it.

What I'm saying is that if someone says that something is Christian it has to be something that Jesus said.

You've already expressed that, and I've told you why I disagree.

What would you say if you were told that the people that you call Muslim aren't Muslim if they don't follow the teachings of Mohammed? Would you feel a need to learn what those teachings were before calling someone a Muslim, or to accept that definition even if you did know? I'm going to call you a Muslim if you call yourself one, call the Qur'an authoritative, dress your wife in a hijab, and support sharia law, and I'll bet that you would, too.

If so, isn't that a double standard?

Do you question the doctrine of people wearing crucifixes who call themselves Christians while citing the Christian Bible as authoritative while promoting the belief in Christ before calling them Christian? I sure don't. So how can I use those criteria? I'd pretty much have to stop calling anybody a Christian.

Ask most Christians how many Christians there are in the world, and they will tell you a little over 2 billion, although they may need to consult Google first. What definition are they using? To them, a Christian is anybody who calls himself a Christian

For example, the ten commandments is not something Jesus said, in fact it's something He preached against.

Well that depends on your individual doctrine. Some say that Jesus is an aspect of Jehovah, who they say wrote the Ten Commandments. But that would be of no interest to a non-Christian. People that want to put up the Ten Commandments in courtrooms to promote what they consider Christian values are Christians to me.

Matthew 6:19 "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth..." Means that your earthly life is temporary compared to living an eternity in heaven. It doesn't mean you shouldn't save your money for your future or your children's future, just don't get too stuck on earthly pursuits.

I have no reason to accept that. I take the words at face value

Luke 12:33 "Sell your possessions and give to the poor". Means that if you really believed in God and the idea of heaven you would live humbly and give money to help others and dedicate what time you could towards helping others. It doesn't mean that you should have nothing at all.

Same answer.

Are you a Christian (by any definition)? I don't know enough about Urantia Book to know whether that rules out being a Christian. You seem to promote and defend Christianity like a Christian.

 

[Super Universe]

Since I'm becoming more sensitive to drifting off topic, I'm choosing to hide my responses in such discussions in a spoiler so that only those interested in the digression will even see it:

Spoiler

My comment was about the best known aspect of Christianity. I don't know what I would call the best aspect of Christianity.



Humanists embody that better than Christians.

Consider the position that Christianity took in the same sex marriage battle. If we lived in a world where homosexuality was the dominant cultural norm and heterosexuality was considered an abomination, and you were a heterosexual man that wanted to marry a heterosexual woman, what would you want others to do for you - permit it, or staunchly oppose you? The Golden Rule says to treat others as you would have them treat you. Who did that in that cultural battle, the Christians or the humanists?

How about if men needed to take a fertilizing pill in order to impregnate their wives. Would it be more consistent with the Golden Rule to allow that choice, or for others to impose their ideological preferences on you by erecting barriers to you getting it? Who is taking which side regarding access to contraceptives?

I realize that these are biological absurdities, but that is irrelevant to my point. I just wanted to put you, who I assume is a straight male, in the place of the people being oppressed by Christians so that you could recognize what you would want and what you would expect from those claiming the Golden Rule as a guiding principle.



I don't blame God for anything. I'm an atheist.

What I said was that an omniscient, omnipotent agent is also omniresponsible. I haven't see that comment rebutted, just more claims that this or that isn't God's fault - it's the fault of Satan or sinful man. Does such a god not have the power to reign in this demon or correct man's nature? It does if it's omnipotent. And if it chooses not to do so, it is responsible for that choice.

If you or anybody else wants to make a counterargument that addresses that specific point rather than just glossing past it and repeating that God is blameless, I would be happy to field it.



You've already expressed that, and I've told you why I disagree.

What would you say if you were told that the people that you call Muslim aren't Muslim if they don't follow the teachings of Mohammed? Would you feel a need to learn what those teachings were before calling someone a Muslim, or to accept that definition even if you did know? I'm going to call you a Muslim if you call yourself one, call the Qur'an authoritative, dress your wife in a hijab, and support sharia law, and I'll bet that you would, too.

If so, isn't that a double standard?

Do you question the doctrine of people wearing crucifixes who call themselves Christians while citing the Christian Bible as authoritative while promoting the belief in Christ before calling them Christian? I sure don't. So how can I use those criteria? I'd pretty much have to stop calling anybody a Christian.

Ask most Christians how many Christians there are in the world, and they will tell you a little over 2 billion, although they may need to consult Google first. What definition are they using? To them, a Christian is anybody who calls himself a Christian



Well that depends on your individual doctrine. Some say that Jesus is an aspect of Jehovah, who they say wrote the Ten Commandments. But that would be of no interest to a non-Christian. People that want to put up the Ten Commandments in courtrooms to promote what they consider Christian values are Christians to me.



I have no reason to accept that. I take the words at face value



Same answer.

Are you a Christian (by any definition)? I don't know enough about Urantia Book to know whether that rules out being a Christian. You seem to promote and defend Christianity like a Christian.

Debates/discussions always evolve. The topic is just a starting point.

Humanists are better Christians than Christians? There are some really good Christians out there, just because they don't fully understand what Jesus taught doesn't mean they're not doing the best they can.

I should consider the position that Christianity took in the same sex marriage battle? Jesus said nothing about same sex marriage so anyone or any church who tries to say that homosexuality is against Christianity is fabricating a lie. I always tell those supposed "Christians" that they are Jews because what they are preaching is ancient Jewish law that the Jews don't even follow anymore. Jesus did not preach ancient Jewish law, He preached against the ten commandments.

Homosexuals have always been a minority, probably 3-5% of the population, so they, like other minority groups, have been targeted.

As for the contraception argument, Jesus said nothing about it. The OT says that you should be fruitful and multiply, once again these supposed "Christians" are using the ancient Jewish law and calling it Christianity when it's not. The sentence "Be fruitful and multiply" doesn't mean be stupid and over populate your household, country, or the planet.

You're thinking that these religious people represent Jesus or God, they don't. No one person or religious group represents God. The thing that most closely represents God is everything in existence, not one tiny part.

You're an atheist? Good, at least you know what the heck you are. A lot of people don't really have a clue.

Does God have the power to reign in Satan? God does not interfere. All that nonsense about God vs Satan is ridiculous, that is like an ant trying to fight the sun. The full answer to this is very long. I would refer you to the Lucifer Rebellion, paper 53 of the Urantia Book.

You disagree that Christianity is only what Jesus said? Because you're upset about what you've experienced. You're not going to just let it go that easily. You want to vent for awhile, maybe forever. You're F'n pissed and people are going to know it. Don't let those messed up "Christians" control you in that way forever, because that's exactly what it is, control. Get really pissed, have a fit, throw things (I like to kick the trash can), then go back to being a mature responsible adult who now has full control of their life even though something bad happened to them in the past, emphasis on past.

You'd pretty much have to stop calling people Christians who don't follow what Jesus said? I think starting from scratch might be the best thing. These super church's that take in so much money just so the preacher man can live an easy luxurious life have nothing at all to do with anything Christ taught.

As for who is a Christian and who isn't, my definition is that Christianity is only what Jesus taught, but, since I follow the Urantia Book I have much more information about Jesus early life than what the New Testament Christians know. In the afterlife we all are going to be Christians or cease to exist.

God did not write the ten commandments. God does not interfere. Moses wrote them. He got the idea for those laws from the ancient Jewish laws which were similar to Hammurabi's laws. If you've ever read Hammurabi's laws you would realize that they sound just like the ten commandments. The Jews went to Egypt and were enslaved, then escaped and took a path along Mt. Horab. The volcano erupted while the Jews were encamped below it and Moses used that to his advantage. The primitive Jews were terrified and had never seen a volcano before.

You take words at face value? Ever hear of symbolism? Allegory? A parable? Is a red and white striped cloth sewn together with a blue field and white stars on it just a towel?

I seem to promote Christianity like a Christian? I promote the parts that I believe are the true Christianity and ardently argue against the parts that I believe are not.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Debates/discussions always evolve. The topic is just a starting point.

Humanists are better Christians than Christians? There are some really good Christians out there, just because they don't fully understand what Jesus taught doesn't mean they're not doing the best they can.

I should consider the position that Christianity took in the same sex marriage battle? Jesus said nothing about same sex marriage so anyone or any church who tries to say that homosexuality is against Christianity is fabricating a lie. I always tell those supposed "Christians" that they are Jews because what they are preaching is ancient Jewish law that the Jews don't even follow anymore. Jesus did not preach ancient Jewish law, He preached against the ten commandments.

Homosexuals have always been a minority, probably 3-5% of the population, so they, like other minority groups, have been targeted.

As for the contraception argument, Jesus said nothing about it. The OT says that you should be fruitful and multiply, once again these supposed "Christians" are using the ancient Jewish law and calling it Christianity when it's not. The sentence "Be fruitful and multiply" doesn't mean be stupid and over populate the planet.

You're thinking that these religious people represent Jesus or God, they don't. No one person or religious group represents God. The thing that most closely represents God is everything in existence, not one tiny part.

You're an atheist? Good, at least you know what the heck you are. A lot of people don't really have a clue.

Does God have the power to reign in Satan? God does not interfere. All that nonsense about God vs Satan is ridiculous, that is like an ant trying to fight the sun. The full answer to this is very long. I would refer you to the Lucifer Rebellion, paper 53 of the Urantia Book.

You disagree that Christianity is only what Jesus said? Because you're upset about what you've experienced. You're not going to just let it go that easily. You want to vent for awhile, maybe forever. You're F'n pissed and people are going to know it. Don't let those messed up "Christians" control you in that way forever, because that's exactly what it is, control. Get really pissed, have a fit, throw things (I like to kick the trash can), then go back to being a mature responsible adult who now has full control of their life even though something bad happened to them in the past, emphasis on past.

You'd pretty much have to stop calling people Christians who don't follow what Jesus said? I think starting from scratch might be the best thing. These super church's that take in so much money just so the preacher man can live an easy luxurious life have nothing at all to do with anything Christ taught.

As for who is a Christian and who isn't, my definition is that Christianity is only what Jesus taught, but, since I follow the Urantia Book I have much more information about Jesus early life than what the New Testament Christians know. In the afterlife we all are going to be Christians or cease to exist.

God did not write the ten commandments. God does not interfere. Moses wrote them. He got the idea for those laws from the ancient Jewish laws which were similar to Hammurabi's laws. If you've ever read Hammurabi's laws you would realize that they sound just like the ten commandments. The Jews went to Egypt and were enslaved, then escaped and took a path along Mt. Horab. The volcano erupted while the Jews were encamped below it and Moses used that to his advantage. The primitive Jews were terrified and had never seen a volcano before.

You take words at face value? Ever hear of symbolism? Allegory? A parable? Is a red and white striped cloth sewn together with a blue field and white stars on it just a towel?

I seem to promote Christianity like a Christian? I promote the parts that I believe are the true Christianity and ardently argue against the parts that I believe are not.

I think that this discussion has played itself out. We seem to be at an impasse.

I've told you that I have little interest in what Christ taught and that it doesn't factor into my assessment of who is a Christian, but you keep returning to that as if it were relevant to us both.

You seem to keep forgetting that I am an atheist. You post as if belief in the Christian God is a shared premise. To me, nobody represents God or Jesus, God does not interfere because He cannot, nor could He have written the Ten Commandments.

Nor do I believe that the Jews were ever captive in Egypt.

It's just not interesting or useful when you disregard what you know my perspective to be.

I also don't understand why you consider opinions that have been carefully considered, are believed sincerely, and that are offered constructively constitute anger. Christianity doesn't affect my life unless you count the church bells that I am hearing right now or the Jehovah's Witnesses that rang my doorbell yesterday. I'm just enjoying discussion.

Thanks for the discussion. We've each made our own case.

 

[Super Universe]

I think that this discussion has played itself out. We seem to be at an impasse.

I've told you that I have little interest in what Christ taught and that it doesn't factor into my assessment of who is a Christian, but you keep returning to that as if it were relevant to us both.

You seem to keep forgetting that I am an atheist. You post as if belief in the Christian God is a shared premise. To me, nobody represents God or Jesus, God does not interfere because He cannot, nor could He have written the Ten Commandments.

Nor do I believe that the Jews were ever captive in Egypt.

It's just not interesting or useful when you disregard what you know my perspective to be.

I also don't understand why you consider opinions that have been carefully considered, are believed sincerely, and that are offered constructively constitute anger. Christianity doesn't affect my life unless you count the church bells that I am hearing right now or the Jehovah's Witnesses that rang my doorbell yesterday. I'm just enjoying discussion.

Thanks for the discussion. We've each made our own case.

I got your argument, "It has to be God's fault". That's it. You don't care what anyone says, "IT'S GODS FAULT!. Oh, wait, I forgot that I don't really believe in God, ok, give me a second, ok, "IF there was a God it would all be His fault, yeah, that's it, that's what I believe."

You might want to explore as much of the earth as you can because this is the only part of the universe you will get to see.

 

[idav]

I got your argument, "It has to be God's fault". That's it. You don't care what anyone says, "IT'S GODS FAULT!. Oh, wait, I forgot that I don't really believe in God, ok, give me a second, ok, "IF there was a God it would all be His fault, yeah, that's it, that's what I believe."

You might want to explore as much of the earth as you can because this is the only part of the universe you will get to see.

Is it Gods fault if he is omnipotent? Should be only so much a human can do if God is to be described as having any sort of godlike powers.

Describing a barbaric god worried about certain tribes and lands is easy to do from the Old Testament, but what your describing is more from the NT. Jesus flipped all those conceptions around. I remember growing up having versions of the Bible that didn't even have the Old Testament.

 

[Super Universe]

Is it Gods fault if he is omnipotent? Should be only so much a human can do if God is to be described as having any sort of godlike powers.

Describing a barbaric god worried about certain tribes and lands is easy to do from the Old Testament, but what your describing is more from the NT. Jesus flipped all those conceptions around. I remember growing up having versions of the Bible that didn't even have the Old Testament.

You keep ignoring free will. You really don't like free will. It really isn't about you having free will, it's about God having free will to experience many personalities. You don't have to like it. Your permission was not asked for. After this you can choose to cease to exist and it will be all over.

Describing a barbaric god involved with humanity is easy to do from the Old Testament? The best way to look at the bible is to see it as an evolution in God theory from primitive to more modern concepts, an eye for an eye is replaced by the idea of forgiveness. Even the primitive Jews evolved in the Old Testament from worshipping a golden calf to a better idea of a God in heaven.

Don't see the bible as the literal word of God because it never was that.

 

[idav]

You keep ignoring free will. You really don't like free will. It really isn't about you having free will, it's about God having free will to experience many personalities. You don't have to like it. Your permission was not asked for. After this you can choose to cease to exist and it will be all over.

Describing a barbaric god involved with humanity is easy to do from the Old Testament? The best way to look at the bible is to see it as an evolution in God theory from primitive to more modern concepts, an eye for an eye is replaced by the idea of forgiveness. Even the primitive Jews evolved in the Old Testament from worshipping a golden calf to a better idea of a God in heaven.

Don't see the bible as the literal word of God because it never was that.

I don't have a problem with free will, I like your post. I think that's what being in the image of God means, having that capacity, not all life is blessed with that ability to think in terms of time.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I got your argument, "It has to be God's fault". That's it. You don't care what anyone says, "IT'S GODS FAULT!. Oh, wait, I forgot that I don't really believe in God, ok, give me a second, ok, "IF there was a God it would all be His fault, yeah, that's it, that's what I believe."

You obviously didn't get my argument. You never addressed it. You just turned your sights on me instead rather than try to explain why you believe that an entity that knows all and can do all isn't responsible for what it has done or not done. You're apparently either frustrated by the argument, offended by it, or both. If you're frustrated by the argument, perhaps that's because it's valid and that recognize that you have no rebuttal. If your offended, then that is just you being offended because I won't judge your god by less lenient standards than I would judge you or me had we the same power.

If you or I had the power to create robots with free will and turn them loose in society, we would responsible for what they do, even more so if we had foreknowledge of what that would be.

I don't see why this is such a confounding matter for you unless it's because you are afraid to judge your god adversely for fear of having your mind read and being punished for it. You wouldn't give this pass to any other entity.

You might want to explore as much of the earth as you can because this is the only part of the universe you will get to see.

You, too. That's life.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

The best way to look at the bible is to see it as an evolution in God theory from primitive to more modern concepts, an eye for an eye is replaced by the idea of forgiveness.

You just implied what every skeptic already believes, namely, that the Bible was written by men and reflects their evolving moral theory, not by a timeless, perfect, and unchanging god.

it's about God having free will to experience many personalities.

No, it's about people having the ability to write whatever they want and have other people believe that a god wrote it or that it expresses the thoughts of a god.

After this you can choose to cease to exist and it will be all over.

You seem to enjoy making that implied threat. There is no reason for you to have made that comment either time you did apart from you not liking people disagreeing with you.

 

[Super Universe]

You just implied what every skeptic already believes, namely, that the Bible was written by men and reflects their evolving moral theory, not by a timeless, perfect, and unchanging god.



No, it's about people having the ability to write whatever they want and have other people believe that a god wrote it or that it expresses the thoughts of a god.



You seem to enjoy making that implied threat. There is no reason for you to have made that comment either time you did apart from you not liking people disagreeing with you.

The bible, and other book based religions, reflect an evolution in human God theory from very primitive to less primitive but the religions that came from these books are still stuck in thousand year old ideas.

When I wrote "It's about God having free will to experience many personalities" I meant the reason for the universe to exist, the meaning of life. Your sentence about people writing things that others believe is the word of God is about the human desire for power and control.

I enjoy making implied threats? I just tell it like it is. There's no threat. You won't be harmed, there's no pain. You will finally get what you want. You will simply cease to exist. What's wrong with that? You blame God for everything and there is no way to leave God's universe but your mind/personality can be turned off forever.