Hell

[URAVIP2ME]

Oh look! Tyler was beyond wrong. How about that? Tyler was obviously one of those idiots who actually think that Kings and other Special Privileged Classes is a good idea....
I submit, instead, the USA, which has lasted quite a bit more than 200 years, in spite of the very ugly idea that Special Classes of People-- with equally Special Privileges is too common among Religious Theology.
Indeed-- under Christianity, the USA followed the Old Testament model over and over-- wiping out or driving away, native peoples into concentration camps. They called it "Divine Right" or some such tomfoolery.
But Never Mind That-- your source, Tyler was an idiot.

It wasn't Just Tyler, but back in 1960's high school we were taught there is No lasting democracy.

False clergy drove away native peoples. Jesus never taught c. camps, etc.
That ' Divine Right ' was neither divine nor right according to the light of Jesus' teachings.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

It wasn't Just Tyler, but back in 1960's high school we were taught there is No lasting democracy.

And they were wrong then? And they are wrong now.

The world has never had a 100% participatory democracy-- we lacked the technology.

Until now.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

False clergy drove away native peoples. Jesus never taught c. camps, etc.
That ' Divine Right ' was neither divine nor right according to the light of Jesus' teachings.

What, pray tell, is a "false clergy"? Who decides? YOU? Some as yet unnamed authority?

The fact that you allow that "false clergy" can even EXIST AT ALL?

Is all the proof we need, that the god in question is either:

1) unwilling to prevent evil
2) incapable of preventing evil
3) is indifferent to evil.

( and, naturally, 4) doesn't exist)

Which is it, in your god's case? 1, 2 or 3?

That this god in question ALLOWS SUCH to exist at all? Not good.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Hello! Have you never heard of the Dark Ages? You cannot get more Theocratic than that!

The modern-day definition of theocracy is: rule by clergy, or rule by clergy class.
The theocracy in which the prophet Daniel believed in is Not clergy rule nor rule by clergy class.- Daniel 2:44
The so-called Dark Ages were brought about by false clergy who even forbid the Bible to people.
People lost their lives even if caught with just one page of Scripture. Some burned alive. Michael Servetus for one.

We are forewarned that false shepherds would fleece the flock of God according to Acts of the Apostles 20:29-30.
So, we should Not be surprised that such religious corruption exists today, but the political will act to get rid of it.
Whenever they ( powers that be ) will be saying, " Peace and Security " it will just be a precursor to the coming great tribulation of Revelation 7:14 before Jesus, as king of God's kingdom, will usher in global Peace on Earth among people of goodwill.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

And they were wrong then? And they are wrong now.
The world has never had a 100% participatory democracy-- we lacked the technology.
Until now.

Yep, technology. Two-edged sword: Atomic energy / atomic bomb.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

What, pray tell, is a "false clergy"? Who decides? YOU? Some as yet unnamed authority?
The fact that you allow that "false clergy" can even EXIST AT ALL?
Is all the proof we need, that the god in question is either:
1) unwilling to prevent evil
2) incapable of preventing evil
3) is indifferent to evil.
( and, naturally, 4) doesn't exist)
Which is it, in your god's case? 1, 2 or 3?
That this god in question ALLOWS SUCH to exist at all? Not good.

An inquiring mind wants to know.
First, God purposed we all be descendants of Adam and Eve according to Genesis 1:28
Free-will choices are made by all.
The passing of time has allowed for all of us to be born and freely think who we would like as Sovereign.
Mankind has got the ' fill the earth ' ( populate the earth ) part down right, but Not the Golden Rule part.
Before evil ends ( Psalms 37:10-11; Proverbs 2:21-22) the good news of God's kingdom would have to be proclaimed on an international scale as being done today mentioned at Matthew 24:14; Acts 1:8.
Modern technology has helped speed up that process because rapid Bible translation is now possible as never before in history. Remote translation offices makes possible for people to have Scripture in their own mother tongue or native language.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

The modern-day definition of theocracy is: rule by clergy, or rule by clergy class.
The theocracy in which the prophet Daniel believed in is Not clergy rule nor rule by clergy class.- Daniel 2:44
The so-called Dark Ages were brought about by false clergy who even forbid the Bible to people.

Yet another example where the god you believe is real, has utterly, completely, failed to be Ethical or even Good.

This isn't looking good for your arguments, here.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Yep, technology. Two-edged sword: Atomic energy / atomic bomb.

Yet, here you are, using a computer: Alan Turing was gay, and was persecuted for being gay because of the bible's words.

But without Turing, the computer you use would not exist.

But wait! It gets worse: Microsoft-- without the atheist Bill Gates? Wouldn't have happened. Or if you are a Mac fan? Steve Jobs, also an atheist.

Oh! Linnux, you cry! Linus Torvald-- atheist.

I find it Quite Interesting with an I, that the majority of modern innovations were done, in spite of religion.

And that never once in the History of Earth, have Secular Scientists had to say, "Oh! We were WRONG! It turned out that Magic--- as described in this Bronze-Age Holey Book -- was right after all!"

Not once.

In fact? All too often? The Deeply Religious went out of their way to fight any and all innovative ideas....!

Ben Franklin invented the Lightning Rod-- and, according to the Religious Authorities? "You are usurping the Right Of God".

Franklin persisted, and soon enough? Insurance companies refused to insure churches unless they also installed lightning rods....

Imagine That? Technology has managed to usurp "God's Law".... !

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

An inquiring mind wants to know.
First, God purposed we all be descendants of Adam and Eve according to Genesis 1:28

Which has 100% been proven false-- DNA facts show that there never was a solitary breeding pair from which all humans descended.

So, pardon me if I simply discount the rest of your "argument" as bogus, since you begin with a flat lie.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Modern technology has helped speed up that process because rapid Bible translation is now possible as never before in history. Remote translation offices makes possible for people to have Scripture in their own mother tongue or native language.

You continue to undermine your god, here!

What sort of evil deity fails to keep his "holy word" in constant update, no-need-for-translations?

One who:

1) doesn't care if the bible is misused (uncaring)
2) is incapable of re-translating to the modern languages (inept)
3) is deliberately allowing the messages to be muddled by internal inconsistencies (evil)

Which is your god, here?

 

[Thief]

Agree, flesh ( physical ) can Not inherit the kingdom of God ( No rapture involved ) - 1 Corinthians 15:50
Those who inherit the kingdom with Jesus are ' resurrected ' to heavenly life - Revelation 20:6; 5:9-10; 2:10
To me, that does Not mean that Jesus does Not have earthly subjects, or citizens, of God's kingdom because Jesus will have subjects from ' sea to sea ' according to Psalms 72:8. Jesus aids those on Earth - Psalms 72:12-14.
Those earthly subjects or citizens are the humble meek who will inherit the Earth as Jesus promised at Matthew 5:5.
No one goes to heaven to die in heaven. The death problem exists here on Earth. Jesus will end death on Earth.
Enemy death will be No more on Earth - 1 Corinthians 15:26; Isaiah 25:8

being meek is not altogether a good thing

why bring anything back to this world?
it is not the kingdom

 

[Thief]

Which has 100% been proven false-- DNA facts show that there never was a solitary breeding pair from which all humans descended.

So, pardon me if I simply discount the rest of your "argument" as bogus, since you begin with a flat lie.

at some point....there were only two.....
in the scheme of regression
our beginning came from a starting point

there may have been ....and I believe so...
many others on the earth

the garden event was an alteration of body and mind
a manipulation
we descended from that pair
we humans were from that point forward
different from all else on this planet

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

at some point....there were only two.....

False. That is not how populations work.

Since Darwin discovered that life evolved, we have been observing new species emerge from older populations.

And it's almost never just two. What happens is many-many individuals in any given population, are slightly better adapted than their associates-- and these multiple-pairs s.lowly separate from the original. After many-many generations of multiple-pairings.

And it's never sudden, either! Indeed, sometimes the split doesn't happen, and the would-be new species re-integrates into the whole, and the whole species changes slightly.

In fact? If you could procure a Time Machine, and travel back in time 60,000 to find a mate among the humans existing at that time?

Odds are: your children (if any) would not be viable. The odds are much better that your modern DNA is no longer compatible with ancient human DNA....

 

[Thief]

False. That is not how populations work.

Since Darwin discovered that life evolved, we have been observing new species emerge from older populations.

And it's almost never just two. What happens is many-many individuals in any given population, are slightly better adapted than their associates-- and these multiple-pairs s.lowly separate from the original. After many-many generations of multiple-pairings.

And it's never sudden, either! Indeed, sometimes the split doesn't happen, and the would-be new species re-integrates into the whole, and the whole species changes slightly.

In fact? If you could procure a Time Machine, and travel back in time 60,000 to find a mate among the humans existing at that time?

Odds are: your children (if any) would not be viable. The odds are much better that your modern DNA is no longer compatible with ancient human DNA....

not false.....
whatever we are ....there was a beginning
that beginning takes two

not three of four....or a billion

it might take several billion to get to that point of divergence.....but
that point is shared by only two