Which bible do you Read?

[Falconer02]

1. Whats your definition of a loving god?

Hmm...I'll try to align this question so a christian would understand (which limits a lot of what I could say, but for the sake typing a lot...). A loving god would be one who does not throw his creations into a mess and then judges them due to his obvious mistakes and misuse of powers. This god would be one who would willingly show himself to his subjects and show proof of his existence (and not rely on blind faith and crazy ancient stories written by primitive people). They would allow them to question whatever they wished to question without any punishment or ignorance. A god that would allow his subjects to not worship him and would still help them-- no questions asked. A loving god would also not allow under any circumstance for any eternal punishment-- that alone would be beyond evil.

2. And using of your brain in relation to that particular god?

Not sure what you mean here. But..."Broadly questioning legitimacy and existence compared to other gods who people believe are just as real as this one." and the ancient text contradictions.

[Getinonthis]

[q

"Broadly questioning legitimacy and existence compared to other gods who people believe are just as real as this one." and the ancient text contradictions.

                                            FACT mentioned below

Pardon me for not being as intellectual as you are, but I didn't quite see your definition of a loving God, all I saw was you verbally attacking what YOU perceive to be wrong with Jehovah (Christian God).
                                So I'll rephrase the question in a way that you can understand and elucidate to my understanding.

Without bashing or comparing to any other god (for the simple FACT that you don't recognize them), what is your definition of a loving God?

[Falconer02]

Pardon me for not being as intellectual as you are, but I didn't quite see your definition of a loving God

Maybe you should read it then? Here, I'll make it easier for you to understand-
1.) One that does not misuse powers or misuse/bait their creations.
2.) Shows undeniable proof of existence.
3.) Let's subjects question what they wish without harsh consequence that the god creates.
4.) Do no harm to world or people living on it.
5.) Does not allow for eternal punishment.

Without bashing or comparing to any other god (for the simple FACT that you don't recognize them), what is your definition of a loving God?

What do I not recognize? Please, with my free will argument in mind, explain what you mean.

[freepcmoney]

Mostly The King James and use The Strongs Concordance. Sometimes I read The Living Bible.

[Getinonthis]

What do I not recognize? Please, with my free will argument in mind, explain what you mean.
[/quote]

Broadly questioning legitimacy and existence"

You stated that your desire is to Broadly question the legitimacy and existence, Simply put if God himself were to part the sky and pick you in his hands (which he will not do seeing that's your will and not his) that you would still have to Court-martial him. And thus if He is not to your standards you'd perform judgment.
Which God would give that authority to any human. Why go to that level to please someone who's clearly had their understanding according to God's precepts darkened.

In your search to disprove God have you found any god to your liking, or that will succumb to your will or programming?

[Falconer02]

Simply put if God himself were to part the sky and pick you in his hands (which he will not do seeing that's your will and not his) that you would still have to Court-martial him. And thus if He is not to your standards you'd perform judgment

If this happened, I would be tortured eternally from the get-go seeing how I questioned and doubted his power and ability to love. Even so, he still would not be worthy of my worship because he is obviously evil. I'm not perfect, but I try to live a moral life. Considering your god is willingly genocidal, I think I have a better hand here.

And for the 14th or so time now, you've completely failed to explain how free will works into the whole picture. Since it's far beyond your reasoning skills, I'll just put it to rest and try to avoid it so I don't confuse you.

In your search to disprove God have you found any god to your liking, or that will succumb to your will or programming?

Why are you trying to make me into a god? But no, not really. They're all fallible and contradict many things, so they're obviously made up. Jainism however is a religion that I find no reason to argue against. It has no head-honcho god but at the same time practices peace to all organisms far beyond that of other major religions.

[Getinonthis]

If this happened, I would be tortured eternally from the get-go seeing how I questioned and doubted his power and ability to love. Even so, he still would not be worthy of my worship because he is obviously evil. I'm not perfect, but I try to live a moral life. Considering your god is willingly genocidal, I think I have a better hand here.

My point exactly, there is no sense in proving or convincing you that Jehovah is God because you've clearly established that you will not serve nor recognize His authority. Since I held no desire to consider you to be as a pagan or an atheist without proof (though at times you came off as one,) my intent was to cautiously see where your belief lies.

And for the 14th or so time now, you've completely failed to explain how free will works into the whole picture. Since it's far beyond your reasoning skills, I'll just put it to rest and try to avoid it so I don't confuse you.

I found that question to be irrelevant, but it took you 14 try's to realize that I would not waste any effort there seeing you started out attacking my "FREE WILL" to serve the Only God I recognize, and attempted to drag other religious parties into the mix to indict me according to my beliefs.
Fal you're not without knowledge of the bible, you just refuse to acknowledge Jehovah's will. So there's no relevance in offering an explanation in an area that you've pointed out that God Himself could not persuade you.

Jainism however is a religion that I find no reason to argue against. It has no head-honcho god but at the same time practices peace to all organisms far beyond that of other major religions.

At first I found it hard to understand how a Jain, which is supposed to be focused on enlightenment and peace with himself (an hermit lifestyle,) find time to be attacking the belief of others. And in such a way that it comes off as HATRED. Aren't you supposed to be a peaceful sect?  
Or is it that you're not a Jain either?
(If so, I find that to be quite puzzling that you'd relinquish the opportunity of following the ONE religion that pleases you.)
If this proves to be true whats your aim/Objective?

[Falconer02]

My point exactly, there is no sense in proving or convincing you that Jehovah is God because you've clearly established that you will not serve nor recognize His authority. Since I held no desire to consider you to be as a pagan or an atheist without proof (though at times you came off as one,) my intent was to cautiously see where your belief lies.

Just for reference, I'm agnostic. My answer to "Is there a god or gods?" is usually "I don't know". Defined gods are totally fake and can be traced back to sun worshipping though (including yours). Atleast you can see and interact with the sun so it makes a lot more sense than all these emotional and jealous gods.

I found that question to be irrelevant, but it took you 14 try's to realize that  I would not waste any effort there seeing you started out attacking my "FREE WILL" to serve the Only God I recognize,

If you refuse to question the contradictions, you're a drone to a belief system. You think you have something even though it's logically impossible to have with your beliefs.

Fal you're not without knowledge of the bible, you just refuse to acknowledge Jehovah's will. So there's no relevance in offering an explanation in an area that you've pointed out that God Himself could not persuade you.

I refuse to to acknowledge any gods unless the worshippers have proof that it's true. You haven't given any proof whatsoever that passes very basic and elemenary skepticism.

Or is it that you're not a Jain either?

I think you misunderstood- I'm not a Jainist. I'm just saying that considering their beliefs, there would be no point in trying to persuade or find contradictions since they belong to (what I consider) a perfectly balanced and harmless belief system. That is deserving of complete respect. Christianity is not considering the hypocrisy, contradictions, shameless attitudes, bloated power, and raw ignorance that's all over the belief system.

[Abrupt]

1. Whats your definition of a loving god?

Hmm...I'll try to align this question so a christian would understand (which limits a lot of what I could say, but for the sake typing a lot...). A loving god would be one who does not throw his creations into a mess and then judges them due to his obvious mistakes and misuse of powers. This god would be one who would willingly show himself to his subjects and show proof of his existence (and not rely on blind faith and crazy ancient stories written by primitive people). They would allow them to question whatever they wished to question without any punishment or ignorance. A god that would allow his subjects to not worship him and would still help them-- no questions asked. A loving god would also not allow under any circumstance for any eternal punishment-- that alone would be beyond evil.

I see a lot of people who come to this sort of conclusion, and especially when being critical of the Christian God.  I know you were not particularly meaning the Christian God but if in my answers I use the word 'God', know that is what I mean.

To your first point I would agree completely and I would also point out that is also a true description of God.  His judgement is only whether or not you violated the rules he set before you, much like a referee would judge a rule violation on a football field.  Is the referee unkind for not considering that the players intention wasn't to perform "pass interference"?  Should he let it slide if the offending player seems sorry for his foul?

If God were to physically reveal himself in such a way as to provide undeniable proof, then we would lose the gift of Grace and of free will.  We would become like animals fixated on a spotlight.  Our actions would be as slaves or coerced subjects and not willing servants.  We would lose 'Faith' because we would now 'Know' the truth.

In regards to the 'eternal punishment', I see much confusion in this matter and all I can say is people should familiarize themselves with concordances, lexicons, and a basic bit of knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages before coming to such conclusions.  I see many people criticize the bible because it was written by man yet they then grant complete trust in men being able to appropriately transcribe Hebrew to Greek to English for instance.

[Getinonthis]

Just for reference, I'm agnostic. My answer to "Is there a god or gods?" is usually "I don't know". Defined gods are totally fake and can be traced back to sun worshipping though (including yours). Atleast you can see and interact with the sun so it makes a lot more sense than all these emotional and jealous gods.

Ok so now you're an agnostic, and your answer to is there a God is usually I don't know. Yet you lean more towards being a Jain which denies the existence of God (contradicting). Then again you relate to the sun because you can see it (physical proof.) yet you said if you had physical proof

Even so, he still would not be worthy of my worship because he is obviously evil.

was your response to Jehovah God(Contradicting again). You went as far as to say you'd choose the latter than to serve Him.

Considering your god is willingly genocidal, I think I have a better hand here.

(Far from being Agnostic)

If you refuse to question the contradictions, you're a drone to a belief system. You think you have something even though it's logically impossible to have with your beliefs.

Is it that I refuse to question the contradictions or is it simply that you're saying I'm a drone for respecting the sovereignty of God?
Fal you're not after biblical answers or explanations as I shared before but your purpose is to get others to rely on fact instead of FAITH.

Why would I choose fact when faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. when I know that without faith it is impossible to please God: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. Heb11:1,6 (just to refresh your memory.)
                                   You can't see gravity nor oxygen does that mean it doesn't exist.
I reached out to Jesus and He reached out to me, and He'll do the same for you if you'll reach out to him. again Hebrews11:6

Take a leap of faith and recite this prayer, invite God to reveal himself to you.

"I know I am a sinner, and my sin separates me from God.
Because He loves me He sent His son, Jesus Christ, to pay the penalty for my sin
by dying on the cross to restore me to fellowship with God.
I invite Jesus Christ to come into my life and I place my trust in him alone for my
salvation. Thank you for giving me eternal life. It is my desire to love you and obey your Word." 

John 3:36 He that believes on the Son has everlasting life: and he that believes not the Son shall not see life;
but the wrath of God stays on him.

Abrupt... Hats off to that explanation. But as simple as it is Fal will still seek a way to contradict it. He's a alright though.

[Falconer02]

Ok so now you're an agnostic, and your answer to is there a God is usually I don't know. Yet you lean more towards being a Jain which denies the existence of God (contradicting). Then again you relate to the sun because you can see it (physical proof.) yet you said if you had physical proof

Are you just putting words in my mouth and willingly misinterpreting what I said? I've always been agnostic here. All I've said is Jainism is a respectable belief system and most gods stem from sun worship which is completely logical seeing how it allows us to live. It's really not that hard to understand.

was your response to Jehovah God(Contradicting again). You went as far as to say you'd choose the latter than to serve Him

If he was real, yes. Evil gods are not worthy of worship if you're a moral person.

(Far from being Agnostic)

I don't believe in your deity. How am I being far from agnostic?

Fal you're not after biblical answers or explanations as I shared before but your purpose is to get others to rely on fact instead of FAITH

Facts work. Faith sometimes works. Religious faith is delusional thinking because there's nothing to show that you're right since you're dealing with magical elements.

He that believes on the Son has everlasting life: and he that believes not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God stays on him.

The fact that you love a god who has a 'wrath' is very dispicable. And who the hell would want eternal life? That's a terrible torture! The greek gods were envious of humans because they could die and cease to exist! I'm stealing this from another thread and quoting the user Queenofnines here--

Would you not similarly go insane never being able to die?  Having to be conscious for all eternity would become painfully boring after a few hundred/thousand years.  Unless you assume heaven will be this endless Disneyland crafted specifically for your deepest desires...which is a really naive way to think, because the Bible speaks very little of what heaven will offer.  So people assume it will be better than death, and fail completely to think about the important issues:

* When I get to heaven and notice quite a few people missing, how will I forget about/cope with all of my loved ones burning in hell?
* How can I realistically expect to be happy for ALL ETERNITY when my brain is wired to get bored with things fairly quickly?  
* How will god prevent people from even THINKING about a sin...will I risk getting kicked out?  My personality will have to be modified BIG TIME to get rid of all the "sinful" parts of me...including many things I enjoy/find central to who I am.

So as you can see, god will have to give everyone routine lobotomies in order for heaven to run smoothly.  There is no other way.  Don't ask me how people get lobotomies without physical brains (because you'll be dead)...it's magic!

If you seriously can't question things like this, you're far too into the hole to actually think critically. You purposefully limit your knowledge of the world which is just plain ignorance.

[Falconer02]

To your first point I would agree completely and I would also point out that is also a true description of God.  His judgement is only whether or not you violated the rules he set before you,

Many christian sects say differently.

much like a referee would judge a rule violation on a football field.  Is the referee unkind for not considering that the players intention wasn't to perform "pass interference"?  Should he let it slide if the offending player seems sorry for his foul?

But I'm not playing a game here and I see no referee. But I'll go with your example just to make a point-- what type of referee would eternally punish the offending player for something so small, finite, and petty?

If God were to physically reveal himself in such a way as to provide undeniable proof, then we would lose the gift of Grace and of free will.  We would become like animals fixated on a spotlight.  Our actions would be as slaves or coerced subjects and not willing servants.  We would lose 'Faith' because we would now 'Know' the truth.

So your god is purposefully keeping knowledge from his creations and also creating the illusion of freewill (you say we have it, but can't explain it rationally). It would make complete sense for a god to come down and explain how it works-- a loving deity (or parent) would do this. Saying blind faith is the answer is a major cop-out here and can lead to any impossible and irrational thought being taken as truth. THAT is what leads to slavery. Knowledge does not.

I see many people criticize the bible because it was written by man yet they then grant complete trust in men being able to appropriately transcribe Hebrew to Greek to English for instance.

On that note, I'd like to quote Falcon9 from another post-
It appears that they are directly implying that the human writers who contributed to the various biblical passages were 'inspired' to mistranslate them in some poorly conceived disinformation campaign designed to get those lacking critical thinking skills to surrender their 'souls' to some xtian daemon known as "god"

[Abrupt]

It would make complete sense for a god to come down and explain how it works-- a loving deity (or parent) would do this. Saying blind faith is the answer is a major cop-out here and can lead to any impossible and irrational thought being taken as truth. THAT is what leads to slavery. Knowledge does not.

I cannot disagree with you more here.  This is a larger topic though than it appears at face.  The Word did come down and explain how it works and was crucified for it.  This isn't exactly what you meant though.  A child doesn't earn the appreciation of the parent by conforming appropriately bound in front of the parent (well that is a bad example I guess as there are some truly unruly children and these parents, being at their ends, would be quite pleased with simply this).  It is when they are apart and the child does right that the parent is pleased and develops trust.  If you sealed your child in a room and he only did what you allowed how pleased could you be?  Also remember that God is love and has given us a 'way out' and that is grace through faith.  If you know you do not and cannot have faith.  Simply obeying the lord does not necessitate a reward, and good works cannot save you.

On that note, I'd like to quote Falcon9 from another post-
It appears that they are directly implying that the human writers who contributed to the various biblical passages were 'inspired' to mistranslate them in some poorly conceived disinformation campaign designed to get those lacking critical thinking skills to surrender their 'souls' to some xtian daemon known as "god"

It isn't quite as sinister as put forth here.  It also isn't as if they were intentionally mistranslated, as words change meaning over times and what could mean one thing then means another thing now -- but surely you know this.  For some the words are enough either way, but for others (who were given more), more is needed and yet even with their self proclaimed superior skills and insight they refuse to take the simple steps necessary to find the truth.  Remember, we are also given concordances and lexicons to use for these purposes.

[Falconer02]

The Word did come down and explain how it works and was crucified for it.

Something was brought to my attention by a friend a while back and when I read this, it popped up in my memory. Obviously mythical heroes throughout history were sacrficed for what they believed in, but considering Jesus sacrificed himself and got to go to heaven, is that really much of a sacrifice? I mean look at how crappy things were back then-- sand getting in your food and lungs constantly, sickness everywhere, stupid and superstitious primitive people that would fall for finger-gag magic tricks.... Let's face it- it was a terrible time to live considering what we have now. Couldn't one argue that this sacrifice was probably the best thing that ever happened to him? Sure he suffered for a bit, but now he gets to sit around heaven all day with his dad! How was anything really sacrificed when put up against that sort of omnipotent supernatural comfort he received afterwards? The physical self is a pretty petty thing to sacrifice when put up against what christians say he has now.

It is when they are apart and the child does right that the parent is pleased and develops trust.  If you sealed your child in a room and he only did what you allowed how pleased could you be?

Here's the thing though- one can interact with the parent in this example. There is obvious proof of the parents existence. Your example does not work unless you introduce an untestable element. The example would make more sense if the child did the right thing because he says the 'friendly' invisible genocidal monster in his closet taught him to do nice things. Still, I don't understand why one would want to develop a relationship with an abusive deity. How can you say you have a choice or free will when it's either obey him or suffer eternally? That's not a choice. That's coercion. "Make him an offer he can't refuse!"

Simply obeying the lord does not necessitate a reward, and good works cannot save you.

Considering your posts are a bit more intelligent than the avg. christian on this forum, I'm sure you've heard the Hitler problem with this belief. I'll make it short to save time-

Hitler = Murdered millions of Jews + Final moments of life he is at peace + asks for forgiveness + praises god through faith = SAVED!
Jew = Led selfless life + finds he has no religious faith + murdered horribly in a gas chamber = HELL!

Do you believe it works like this?

It isn't quite as sinister as put forth here.  It also isn't as if they were intentionally mistranslated, as words change meaning over times and what could mean one thing then means another thing now -- but surely you know this.  For some the words are enough either way, but for others (who were given more), more is needed and yet even with their self proclaimed superior skills and insight they refuse to take the simple steps necessary to find the truth.

The simple steps that are necessary to find truth lie outside of the bible (or any religious doctrine). Educating and finding where these stories came from is very simple and it does not take much to realize that they're just myths.

[Abrupt]

Here's the thing though- one can interact with the parent in this example. There is obvious proof of the parents existence. Your example does not work unless you introduce an untestable element. The example would make more sense if the child did the right thing because he says the 'friendly' invisible genocidal monster in his closet taught him to do nice things. Still, I don't understand why one would want to develop a relationship with an abusive deity. How can you say you have a choice or free will when it's either obey him or suffer eternally? That's not a choice. That's coercion. "Make him an offer he can't refuse!"

You are too caught up in the imagery of the analogy to see the point I was making.  Remember that the parents are not offering you a reward for compliance such as eternal life, and even if they offered a reward at all it could never compare and could never be anything one wasn't capable of obtaining independently.  It isn't a choice of obey him or suffer eternally, you are quite mistaken there.

Considering your posts are a bit more intelligent than the avg. christian on this forum, I'm sure you've heard the Hitler problem with this belief. I'll make it short to save time-

Hitler = Murdered millions of Jews + Final moments of life he is at peace + asks for forgiveness + praises god through faith = SAVED!
Jew = Led selfless life + finds he has no religious faith + murdered horribly in a gas chamber = HELL!

Do you believe it works like this?

Could Hitler have been saved?  Yes, but not simply by asking for forgiveness, it is more involved than a simple utterance of a request.

Did the Jewish people burned in the gas chambers not go to heaven?  I don't know.  I have pondered over this question and I cannot pretend to have an answer.  I 'want' to believe a path of salvation was available to them but I have nothing supporting that desire.

The simple steps that are necessary to find truth lie outside of the bible (or any religious doctrine). Educating and finding where these stories came from is very simple and it does not take much to realize that they're just myths.

My point was that you put forth many arguments against the bible and use analogies of the bible that are fallacious because of your confused understanding.  Yet you posted a quote referencing critical thinking skills yet you fully fail to use the same skills to realize that your assumptions are false.  You try to get me to defend a position I don't believe and one that is easily dismissed with a little 'critical thinking' and investigation.