Is God really Just?

[jay_a2j]

Ever watch history channel?

Yes, but I didn't know that everything on it was FACT.

[Juan_Bottom]

Ever watch history channel?

Yes, but I didn't know that everything on it was FACT.

AHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm not laughing at you Jay, It's just that I just said this....

I like to call it the Bible History Channel.

It's only fuuuuunnnnyyyyyyyy to me, I know...

[FabledIntegral]

There was nothing nonsensical about my post Jay.
You may not agree with it, but it made sense.
The Bible was written by men, and selected by men.
Men are fallible.
Therefore: the Bible is fallible.

There may or may not be flaws in my argument, but it does make sense.

Actually, it doesn't make sense.

Men wrote the Bible.
Men are falliable.
Therefore the Bible is falliable.

That uses A -> B, A -> C, therefore B -> C.

Dogs have four legs.
Dogs eat meat.
Therefore, all things with four legs eat meat.

[joecoolfrog]

There was nothing nonsensical about my post Jay.
You may not agree with it, but it made sense.
The Bible was written by men, and selected by men.
Men are fallible.
Therefore: the Bible is fallible.

There may or may not be flaws in my argument, but it does make sense.

Except that the Bible isn't "fallible" because God himself chose who to write it down and what to write down. And I think that God is wise enough to choose men who wouldn't "mess it up".

You do realise that we can just turn around your tedious God default defence by constantly quoting Satan in response, if you have nothing to say than why post. A bigger man than you would just admit that he had blind faith and thats the end of it, surely a more honest and dignified stance than quoting the same set non answers over and over again. Do you guys get sent a newsletter with a steady supply of stonewalling responses, what sort of person would rather stifle debate than strive to learn ?

[jay_a2j]

There was nothing nonsensical about my post Jay.
You may not agree with it, but it made sense.
The Bible was written by men, and selected by men.
Men are fallible.
Therefore: the Bible is fallible.

There may or may not be flaws in my argument, but it does make sense.

Except that the Bible isn't "fallible" because God himself chose who to write it down and what to write down. And I think that God is wise enough to choose men who wouldn't "mess it up".

You do realise that we can just turn around your tedious God default defence by constantly quoting Satan in response, if you have nothing to say than why post. A bigger man than you would just admit that he had blind faith and thats the end of it, surely a more honest and dignified stance than quoting the same set non answers over and over again. Do you guys get sent a newsletter with a steady supply of stonewalling responses, what sort of person would rather stifle debate than strive to learn ?

meh, pot meet kettle?

[joecoolfrog]

There was nothing nonsensical about my post Jay.
You may not agree with it, but it made sense.
The Bible was written by men, and selected by men.
Men are fallible.
Therefore: the Bible is fallible.

There may or may not be flaws in my argument, but it does make sense.

Except that the Bible isn't "fallible" because God himself chose who to write it down and what to write down. And I think that God is wise enough to choose men who wouldn't "mess it up".

You do realise that we can just turn around your tedious God default defence by constantly quoting Satan in response, if you have nothing to say than why post. A bigger man than you would just admit that he had blind faith and thats the end of it, surely a more honest and dignified stance than quoting the same set non answers over and over again. Do you guys get sent a newsletter with a steady supply of stonewalling responses, what sort of person would rather stifle debate than strive to learn ?

meh, pot meet kettle?

You are now simply being dishonest,ask a question and I will give you a straight answer and you know it.

[PLAYER57832]

There was nothing nonsensical about my post Jay.
You may not agree with it, but it made sense.
The Bible was written by men, and selected by men.
Men are fallible.
Therefore: the Bible is fallible.

There may or may not be flaws in my argument, but it does make sense.

Except that the Bible isn't "fallible" because God himself chose who to write it down and what to write down. And I think that God is wise enough to choose men who wouldn't "mess it up".

And yet he isn't wise enough to appreciate blaming us for his own mistakes?

By which I mean, sending us to hell, when he's the one who made us that way. I may only be human, but even I get that. I don't know if the Christian God is all that wise. 'God made man in his image, and man returned him in kind.'

No, blame is not involved, any more than blame is involved if a rock falls and hits someone.

God warned Adam and Eve not to partake of the fruit. They did, therefore human beings now have knowledge of good and evil, of sin ... and are held by those limitations. We have responsibility that we had not before, just as wild animals don't bear "responsibility" for their actions. It put a wedge between us and God.

BUT, God also gave us a means for reconciliation. First he gave us the law. It took time for us to learn to live it. Humans had to learn many lessons. Then came Christ. Christ brings forgiveness, reconcilliation. Yet to come is the full reconcilliation.

As a note, most Christians, that is Protestants and Roman Catholics, do not believe in the rapture, at least as put forward by the "Fundamentalists". We DO believe that Christ will return, but the idea of the Rapture began just over 100 years ago. It originated with one person here in the US.

You do NOT have to believe, that is not at all what I am suggesting. Nor do you have to agree that God is just. BUT, you should at least understand how Christians feel (and Buddhists, and Hindus and Jews and Moslems) because how we each think affects our decisions in the world.

Understanding is key to everybody, because, like it or not, we ARE all "in this together".

[Backglass]

The main difference is that you don't really believe any of that and are plain and simply mocking those of us who do have serious beliefs.

Who are you to say my belief in Leprechauns is not serious? How dare you!

You may not like it...but my Religion is no different and no less real than yours. "Taking it serious" does not make it real.

The intelligent person is able to allow that even that which they do not believe might be true.

I would say the intelligent person doesn't devote their life to stories that might be real.

Or, to put it in other words: Usually you only attack that which threatens you.

And you must feel very threatened.

I have said I don't agree with you, but I have not mocked you. Mockery is not argument, it is insult. Insult is beyond discussion, it is the realm of those who have no real backing to their arguments.

I say it's comedy and many would agree. It is only mockery when it hits too close to home, eh?

[william18]

There was nothing nonsensical about my post Jay.
You may not agree with it, but it made sense.
The Bible was written by men, and selected by men.
Men are fallible.
Therefore: the Bible is fallible.

There may or may not be flaws in my argument, but it does make sense.

Except that the Bible isn't "fallible" because God himself chose who to write it down and what to write down. And I think that God is wise enough to choose men who wouldn't "mess it up".

And yet he isn't wise enough to appreciate blaming us for his own mistakes?

By which I mean, sending us to hell, when he's the one who made us that way. I may only be human, but even I get that. I don't know if the Christian God is all that wise. 'God made man in his image, and man returned him in kind.'

It's not his fault that we go to hell, it's ours. There is something he gave us called free-will. We can believe what we want, but God did so much for us that if someone blatently shunned him then they will go to hell. It's your descision/risk if you don't want to beleive in him, but don't expect to give him the blame when you go to hell.

[PLAYER57832]

The main difference is that you don't really believe any of that and are plain and simply mocking those of us who do have serious beliefs.

Who are you to say my belief in Leprechauns is not serious? How dare you!

You may not like it...but my Religion is no different and no less real than yours. "Taking it serious" does not make it real.

The intelligent person is able to allow that even that which they do not believe might be true.

I would say the intelligent person doesn't devote their life to stories that might be real.

Or, to put it in other words: Usually you only attack that which threatens you.

And you must feel very threatened.

I have said I don't agree with you, but I have not mocked you. Mockery is not argument, it is insult. Insult is beyond discussion, it is the realm of those who have no real backing to their arguments.

I say it's comedy and many would agree. It is only mockery when it hits too close to home, eh?

I have said you are wrong... I have not mocked you or belittled you or really done more than say that "I believe what I believe and you are welcome to believe what you believe".

You, on the other hand persist in attacking me and criticizing the intelligence of the billions of individuals who all share my faith.

Understand that distinction and you will be a long way toward effectively communicating, as opposed to simple showmanship.

You see, that's the thing. Up until that comment, it was a discussion. Jay, you, I did not agree, but we were discussing. With that comment, you threw out not only any potential for future communication on the subject, but pretty much did away with any understanding that might have existed.

In short, you blew the argument for a short laugh ... maybe (psycologically speaking, that is ... ) because you felt threatened, maybe because you were bored ... but you basically erased the entire previous debate by that one remark.

[PLAYER57832]

There was nothing nonsensical about my post Jay.
You may not agree with it, but it made sense.
The Bible was written by men, and selected by men.
Men are fallible.
Therefore: the Bible is fallible.

There may or may not be flaws in my argument, but it does make sense.

Actually, it doesn't make sense.

Men wrote the Bible.
Men are falliable.
Therefore the Bible is falliable.

That uses A -> B, A -> C, therefore B -> C.

Dogs have four legs.
Dogs eat meat.
Therefore, all things with four legs eat meat.

It gets much more basic than that. Christians believe that the Bible is divinely inspired... That is, it is not strictly from men.

You don't have to agree, but your logic fails as irrelevant.

[joecoolfrog]

There was nothing nonsensical about my post Jay.
You may not agree with it, but it made sense.
The Bible was written by men, and selected by men.
Men are fallible.
Therefore: the Bible is fallible.

There may or may not be flaws in my argument, but it does make sense.

Except that the Bible isn't "fallible" because God himself chose who to write it down and what to write down. And I think that God is wise enough to choose men who wouldn't "mess it up".

And yet he isn't wise enough to appreciate blaming us for his own mistakes?

By which I mean, sending us to hell, when he's the one who made us that way. I may only be human, but even I get that. I don't know if the Christian God is all that wise. 'God made man in his image, and man returned him in kind.'

It's not his fault that we go to hell, it's ours. There is something he gave us called free-will. We can believe what we want, but God did so much for us that if someone blatently shunned him then they will go to hell. It's your descision/risk if you don't want to beleive in him, but don't expect to give him the blame when you go to hell.

But its all speculative isnt it, you think we are courting hell, we suspect you are wasting your time. At the end of the day we can believe what we like and there is no problem unless we try to forcibly impose our beliefs on others, especially when the others are vulnerable children.

[kagetora]

There was nothing nonsensical about my post Jay.
You may not agree with it, but it made sense.
The Bible was written by men, and selected by men.
Men are fallible.
Therefore: the Bible is fallible.

There may or may not be flaws in my argument, but it does make sense.

Except that the Bible isn't "fallible" because God himself chose who to write it down and what to write down. And I think that God is wise enough to choose men who wouldn't "mess it up".

And yet he isn't wise enough to appreciate blaming us for his own mistakes?

By which I mean, sending us to hell, when he's the one who made us that way. I may only be human, but even I get that. I don't know if the Christian God is all that wise. 'God made man in his image, and man returned him in kind.'

It's not his fault that we go to hell, it's ours. There is something he gave us called free-will. We can believe what we want, but God did so much for us that if someone blatently shunned him then they will go to hell. It's your descision/risk if you don't want to beleive in him, but don't expect to give him the blame when you go to hell.

But what about "God's endall plan?" I was for 12 years a Christian, and this was pounded into me nearly every time I complained about anything. So by sending us to hell, is that part of his plan? Basically, that says to me that he doesn't love us. He just uses us for examples to people.

[PLAYER57832]

But what about "God's endall plan?" I was for 12 years a Christian, and this was pounded into me nearly every time I complained about anything. So by sending us to hell, is that part of his plan? Basically, that says to me that he doesn't love us. He just uses us for examples to people.

I don't know what church you went to. Some do preach what I would pretty much call hatred. Others preach love ... but in a way that binds, instead of frees. But I can answer the way my church does.

First, hell is not so much a place as seperation from God. When you sin, even small ones, you turn away from God. Christ died to reunite us. Believe in him and you are returned to God.

As for the rules, like all rules, even Earthly ones (though earthly rules are quite imperfect), they are intended to help us live better lives here and now. Not necessarily easy, but better than if they were not there.

When you sin, it is like a child running out in front of a car. Tragic, certainly something we try our best to prevent ... and yet, it happens. It happens to even the best parents, though we all prefer not to think too much about that. But, we also cannot lock our children in a box ... even if it would keep them "safe". Safe, but they would not really be living. Of course, this is not a great analogy. God IS perfect and God does know all. You could/can/some people do argue that God could prevent the fall, could not make us the way we are.

BUT, here is the thing. Despite all, I pretty well like being human. Maybe just because I don't know anything else. To be human is to be what we are ... the good and the bad. I would argue that perhaps God could have prevented Eve from eating that apple. BUT, we would not be humans as we are today.

Ultimately, there IS a lot of tragedy. Sometimes, when things go really bad, it is hard to see anything else. BUT, there is also hope. There is love and there is goodness.

I know it sounds quite trite, but it is true. I have only to look at my two sons to know that it all, that everything I have done in my life is "worth it". And that is about the only answer available.

[Neoteny]

First, hell is not so much a place as seperation from God. When you sin, even small ones, you turn away from God. Christ died to reunite us. Believe in him and you are returned to God.

Ack!

[PLAYER57832]

First, hell is not so much a place as seperation from God. When you sin, even small ones, you turn away from God. Christ died to reunite us. Believe in him and you are returned to God.

Ack!

You don't have to believe or agree, but it is what most Christians believe.

[jay_a2j]

First, hell is not so much a place as seperation from God. When you sin, even small ones, you turn away from God. Christ died to reunite us. Believe in him and you are returned to God.

Ack!

You don't have to believe or agree, but it is what most Christians believe.

I don't know what church you go to and I don't even want to know.

Hell is a place, where there is "weeping and gnashing of teeth", "fire and brimstone". And yes, separation from God. But lets try not to sugar coat what it is.

Oh, and knock off the "that's what most Christians believe" crap, as if you change your views based on "what most Christians believe". How about believing what THE BIBLE says for a change?

[PLAYER57832]

First, hell is not so much a place as seperation from God. When you sin, even small ones, you turn away from God. Christ died to reunite us. Believe in him and you are returned to God.

Ack!

You don't have to believe or agree, but it is what most Christians believe.

I don't know what church you go to and I don't even want to know.

Hell is a place, where there is "weeping and gnashing of teeth", "fire and brimstone". And yes, separation from God. But lets try not to sugar coat what it is.

Oh, and knock off the "that's what most Christians believe" crap, as if you change your views based on "what most Christians believe". How about believing what THE BIBLE says for a change?

How about accepting that your church is not the only one that reads and studies the Bible.

No, religion is not done by vote. BUT, when you insist on trying to marginalize my beliefs and claim that I am speaking in ignorant isolation... sorry, you are wrong and I WILL say so.

Because, unless you define Christianity to ONLY include those who think as you do, I am absolutely correct.

And that you seem so completely unaware of that ... speaks quite poorly of your education.
You don't have to agree, any more than any body else, BUT if you wish to be taken seriously, then you do absolutely need to acknowledge that a VERY large number of people do not accept what you proclaim "all Christians" think. THAT is a fact.

I have as much a right to voice my views as you. If anything, more, because I DO have the backing of so many people whom you choose to ignore.

[jay_a2j]

How about accepting that your church is not the only one that reads and studies the Bible.

And, if you are going to dispute my "what most Christians believe" statement ... you need to do a bit more research. Because, unless you define Christianity to ONLY include those who think as you do, I am absolutely correct.

And that you seem so completely unaware of that ... speaks quite poorly of your education.

I have as much a right to voice my views as you. If anything, more, because I DO have the backing of so many people whom you choose to ignore.

You can believe whatever you want to believe, I couldn't care less. What YOU need to stop doing is leading people astray and lying to them with your, "well, that's what most Christians believe". Because dear, in the 1600's "most Christians" believed the Earth was FLAT! (which is what happens when you rely on "the majority" instead of divine guidance)

Lets not compare education level, you don't want to go there.

I have the "backing" of the Word of God. So you can KEEP the backing of your church till Hell freezes over.

[PLAYER57832]

How about accepting that your church is not the only one that reads and studies the Bible.

And, if you are going to dispute my "what most Christians believe" statement ... you need to do a bit more research. Because, unless you define Christianity to ONLY include those who think as you do, I am absolutely correct.

And that you seem so completely unaware of that ... speaks quite poorly of your education.

I have as much a right to voice my views as you. If anything, more, because I DO have the backing of so many people whom you choose to ignore.

I have the "backing" of the Word of God. .

The funny thing is, we do too.
And education is much more than a label. Having a PhD means you know a lot about a very narrow subject, but not necesarily much about anything else.... I have taught quite a few PhD's ... and that is the literal truth!

[jay_a2j]

How about accepting that your church is not the only one that reads and studies the Bible.

And, if you are going to dispute my "what most Christians believe" statement ... you need to do a bit more research. Because, unless you define Christianity to ONLY include those who think as you do, I am absolutely correct.

And that you seem so completely unaware of that ... speaks quite poorly of your education.

I have as much a right to voice my views as you. If anything, more, because I DO have the backing of so many people whom you choose to ignore.

I have the "backing" of the Word of God. .

The funny thing is, we do too.
And education is much more than a label. I have taught some pretty stupid PhD's ... and that is the quite literal truth!

So where did you get Hell was not a literal place?

Because according to This Poll 62% of Americans believe in Hell.

[suggs]

There was nothing nonsensical about my post Jay.
You may not agree with it, but it made sense.
The Bible was written by men, and selected by men.
Men are fallible.
Therefore: the Bible is fallible.

There may or may not be flaws in my argument, but it does make sense.

Actually, it doesn't make sense.

Men wrote the Bible.
Men are falliable.
Therefore the Bible is falliable.

That uses A -> B, A -> C, therefore B -> C.

Dogs have four legs.
Dogs eat meat.
Therefore, all things with four legs eat meat.

No.
You are saying my argument is logically flawed.
Or rather, it is not NECESSARILY TRUE.

My point was that it made SENSE not that it was a perfect logical syllogism.
Indeed, you prove my point. Four legged things eat meat makes perfect sense -it has intelligible meaning. I understand what that means.
Of course, it may be false -but it has meaning.

You're talking about logical validity, i was talking about meaning.

[PLAYER57832]

How about accepting that your church is not the only one that reads and studies the Bible.

And, if you are going to dispute my "what most Christians believe" statement ... you need to do a bit more research. Because, unless you define Christianity to ONLY include those who think as you do, I am absolutely correct.

And that you seem so completely unaware of that ... speaks quite poorly of your education.

I have as much a right to voice my views as you. If anything, more, because I DO have the backing of so many people whom you choose to ignore.

I have the "backing" of the Word of God. .

The funny thing is, we do too.
And education is much more than a label. I have taught some pretty stupid PhD's ... and that is the quite literal truth!

So where did you get Hell was not a literal place?

Because according to This Poll 62% of Americans believe in Hell.

This is a question of English, not the Bible. I said "not so much" ... you took that to mean "not at all".
but, if you want to argue how many angels can fit on the head of a pin ... go ahead.

I am not interested in convincing you to think as I. I am only interested that you stop proclaiming your beliefs as the only acceptable version of Christianity. You can think how you want, but you are the one "leading folks astray" when you claim things like Christians don't believe Evolution, etc. WE do!

But, thankfully, most people are already aware of this, even if you are not.

[jay_a2j]

How about accepting that your church is not the only one that reads and studies the Bible.

And, if you are going to dispute my "what most Christians believe" statement ... you need to do a bit more research. Because, unless you define Christianity to ONLY include those who think as you do, I am absolutely correct.

And that you seem so completely unaware of that ... speaks quite poorly of your education.

I have as much a right to voice my views as you. If anything, more, because I DO have the backing of so many people whom you choose to ignore.

I have the "backing" of the Word of God. .

The funny thing is, we do too.
And education is much more than a label. I have taught some pretty stupid PhD's ... and that is the quite literal truth!

So where did you get Hell was not a literal place?

Because according to This Poll 62% of Americans believe in Hell.

This is a question of English, not the Bible. I said "not so much" ... you took that to mean "not at all".
but, if you want to argue how many angels can fit on the head of a pin ... go ahead.

I am not interested in convincing you to think as I. I am only interested that you stop proclaiming your beliefs as the only acceptable version of Christianity. You can think how you want, but you are the one "leading folks astray" when you claim things like Christians don't believe Evolution, etc. WE do!

But, thankfully, most people are already aware of this, even if you are not.

I think I figured you out. Universal Unitarian ring a bell? If anyone is "proclaiming" their beliefs as "the only acceptable version" it is you. And each time you put "well, this is what most Christians believe" I shudder at the thought! Just state what YOU believe, don't try to push it off as the majority and all other beliefs are a minority. Do not speak for all of Christianity, because in the circles I travel in, your views are the minority.

[suggs]

I admit I'm no expert on Xianity.
But Love is a key, if not THE key tenant or theme of Jesus' teachings.
I see little love (or its offspring, tolerance) in your posts Jay.
Player at least seems to actually live by the teachings of Jesus.
I suspect Jay you're not really a xian.