Originally posted by ivanhoeIvanhoe: I answered your question.
I wasn't talking about "God-knowledge".
I asked you "Who is your God ?"
So, if I understand you correctly, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is not the God you worship.
Therefore again my question: Who is your God ? Who is the God you worship ?
When are you going to answer my question regarding 'individual'
in the Abortion Thread, long passed?
Until you demonstrate a genuine interest in participating in debate
with giving straight answers to sincere questions, then don't expect
me to answer anything you ask.
Nemesio
Originally posted by NemesioNemesio: "Ivanhoe: I answered your question."
Ivanhoe: I answered your question.
When are you going to answer my question regarding 'individual'
in the Abortion Thread, long passed?
Until you demonstrate a genuine interest in participating in debate
with giving straight answers to sincere questions, then don't expect
me to answer anything you ask.
Nemesio
No you didn't. You dodged the question "Who is your God" by sidestepping to the questions of the attributes God has or should have or what God is. Therefore again: Who is your God ? Or should I ask, as a Christian: Who is your god ? It is not the God of Abraham and therefore it cannot possibly be the God of the Christians.
Asking "Who is your God" is a question, an invitation, to identify your god.
Nemesio: "When are you going to answer my question regarding 'individual' in the Abortion Thread, long passed?
It was about the zygote having an identity, by the way.
As I told you before, it will take a long time. Longer than I expected. A couple of years I'm afraid. So, don't hold your breath.
Nemesio: "Until you demonstrate a genuine interest in participating in debate with giving straight answers to sincere questions, then don't expect me to answer anything you ask."
...... "giving straight answers to sincere questions" ..... you got nerve ...
Originally posted by ivanhoeIt's a dumb question. Let's say your name is Joe Smith. If I say, 'Who are you?'
[b]Nemesio: "Ivanhoe: I answered your question."
No you didn't. You dodged the question "Who is your God" by sidestepping to the questions of the attributes God has or should have or what God is. Therefore again: Who is your God ? What is His Name ? Or should I ask, as a Christian: Who is your god ? What is his name ?
Nemesio: "When are yo ...[text shortened]... ask."
...... "giving straight answers to sincere questions" ..... you got nerve ...[/b]
and you say 'Joe Smith' what does this tell people?
Nothing. It's a label. God is bigger than labels. Your catechism tells you that.
I can only define God by the characteristics that He embraces. So, for example,
if you think that God actually struck down innocents in Egypt, then we aren't talking
about the same God. If you think God inspired the parable of the Prodigal Son, then
we are talking about the same God.
But I'm tired of your asking questions and refusing to answer others. You routinely
point to 'answers' in previous posts that aren't there. So, I'll thank you to stop asking
me the same meaningless questions like 'what religion are you' and start engaging in
real debate.
Nemesio
Originally posted by NemesioNemesio: " If you think God inspired the parable of the Prodigal Son, then we are talking about the same God."
It's a dumb question. Let's say your name is Joe Smith. If I say, 'Who are you?'
and you say 'Joe Smith' what does this tell people?
Nothing. It's a label. God is bigger than labels. Your catechism tells you that.
I can only define God by the characteristics that He embraces. So, for example,
if you think that God actually struck down in ...[text shortened]... ningless questions like 'what religion are you' and start engaging in
real debate.
Nemesio
Does this mean you worship the God who inspired the parable of the Prodigal Son ?
Originally posted by ivanhoeWorship is a tricky word, Ivanhoe. That is, I worship in a way that does not
[b]Nemesio: " If you think God inspired the parable of the Prodigal Son, then we are talking about the same God."
Does this mean you worship the God who inspired the parable of the Prodigal Son ?[/b]
concord with most people's ideas.
And don't ask me about it, I consider the matter private.
But, yes, I feel that the Supreme Being inspired the parable of the Prodigal
Son and that parable (as an example) has had and does have a profound impact
on the way in which I determine how I should act towards other people.
Nemesio
Originally posted by NemesioNemesio: "But, yes, I feel that the Supreme Being inspired the parable of the Prodigal Son and that parable (as an example) has had and does have a profound impact on the way in which I determine how I should act towards other people."
Worship is a tricky word, Ivanhoe. That is, I worship in a way that does not
concord with most people's ideas.
And don't ask me about it, I consider the matter private.
But, yes, I feel that the Supreme Being inspired the parable of the Prodigal
Son and that parable (as an example) has had and does have a profound impact
on the way in which I determine how I should act towards other people.
Nemesio
Nemesio
That's a statement satan could have used in describing his relationship with the God of the Scriptures. In particular when I read your very cryptic and dodging first sentences I can't help thinking about God's adversary. Is it satan you "worship" ?
Originally posted by ivanhoeAre you completely nuts or just trying to bully and harass Nemesio?
[b]Nemesio: "But, yes, I feel that the Supreme Being inspired the parable of the Prodigal Son and that parable (as an example) has had and does have a profound impact on the way in which I determine how I should act towards other people."
Nemesio
That's a statement satan could have used in describing his relationship with the God of the Scriptur ...[text shortened]... ing first sentences I can't help thinking about God's adversary. Is it satan you "worship" ?[/b]
Originally posted by NemesioWhat exactly entails “worship” has bothered me for a long time too. Protestant theologian Paul Tillich I think linked it to what your “ultimate concern” is. In Hebrew, the two words that seem to often be translated as worship are avodah and shaha. Avodah means to work or to serve (I seem to recall that the Greek leiturgia, from which we derive “liturgy” has this root meaning as well). Shaha means to bow down, and is related to sh’hut or pit, so would seem to imply some “lowliness,” or perhaps just ritualistic bowing.
Worship is a tricky word, Ivanhoe. That is, I worship in a way that does not
concord with most people's ideas.
And don't ask me about it, I consider the matter private.
But, yes, I feel that the Supreme Being inspired the parable of the Prodigal
Son and that parable (as an example) has had and does have a profound impact
on the way in which I determine how I should act towards other people.
Nemesio
In another connection, I quoted the prophet Amos today:
Amos 5:18 Alas for you who desire the day of YHVH! Why do you want the day of YHVH? It is darkness, not light;
19 as if someone fled from a lion, and was met by a bear; or went into the house and rested a hand against the wall, and was bitten by a snake.
20 Is not the day of YHVH darkness, not light, and gloom with no brightness in it?
21 I hate, I despise your festivals, and I take no delight in your solemn assemblies.
22 Even though you offer me your burnt offerings and grain offerings, I will not accept them; and the offerings of well-being of your fatted animals I will not look upon.
23 Take away from me the noise of your songs; I will not listen to the melody of your harps.
24 But let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream.
I might also quote Micah:
Micah 6:8 He has told you, O mortal, what is good; and what does YHVH require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?
It seems to me that such things are far more difficult—even often more difficult to discern—than declarations of creeds or ritual liturgies (valuable as they may be). On the other hand, there may be plenty of people who are doing the first (avodah) without doing the second (shaha), and vice versa.
I remember Anthony DeMello, S.J., referring to the righteous in Matthew 25 saying: “Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry and gave you food, or thirsty and gave you something to drink? And when was it that we saw you a stranger and welcomed you, or naked and gave you clothing? And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison and visited you?” And the king will answer them, “Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.” DeMello’s comment: “They didn’t know.” They didn’t know they were being righteous. They didn’t know they were engaged in avodah. They weren’t even trying.
Who wants to make the claim of being righteous? Not me. Who wants to make a claim for their own avodah? Not me. There is a tradition in the Talmud that there are, at any given time, 36 truly righteous Jews (called the lamed vav, thirty-six) in the world, some of them known, some not—some not even to themselves. There are similarly 30 righteous gentiles. (I do not know if these numbers represent an actual count, or are, as is so often the case with Hebrew numbers, symbolic.) If a tzaddik (righteous person) can be so hidden as to have their righteousness hidden even from themselves, who wants to make a claim?
Originally posted by NemesioSorry, Scripture says God does not lie. And how could he steal since he owns it all anyway. The point is the commandments were written by God to men, they were not written by God to God. God establishes morality for men by express what he commands us to do in obedience to him - he can not disobey himself. Saying God can commit murder is illogical.
Right. Similarly, God can lie, steal, and do all sorts of other
things He defines as sin for humankind because He is above it.
Nemesio
Originally posted by ivanhoeThis is just an interesting observation, but I was starting some research for your “Are Satanists theists” thread, and got this far:
To sum it all up:
God is the Lord of Life and satan is the lord of lies.
There are 18 mentions of Satan in the Hebrew Scriptures, all but three of them in the first two chapters of Job.
In First Chronicles 21:1 it says: “Satan stood up against Israel, and incited David to count the people of Israel.” This is interesting, because in 2 Samuel 24:1, in what appears to be a reference to the same event, it says: “Again the anger of YHVH was kindled against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, "Go, count the people of Israel and Judah.” (my italics) According to my one study Bible, “Samuel and Kings served as the major source for the Chronicler, though his copy of these books differed in significant ways from the text as we now have it in the Hebrew Bible.” (The Harper-Collins Study Bible, New Revised Standard Version)
The other two references are in Zechariah 3:1 & 2. Too tired tonight to look at that further, but will assign myself to read Zechariah tomorrow.
Satan appears 35 times in the NT. The word devil does not appear in the Tanach, but appears 36 times in the NT. The word demon does not appear in the Tanach (but demons, plural, does twice); demon appears 21 times, and demons 28 times in the NT. Lucifer (or “day star” ) appears in the Tanach once, but I do not think it refers to Satan.
The role of Satan (ha shatan, the adversary) seems to be ambiguous in the Hebrew Scriptures, and seems to have developed late as the personification of evil. But I have a lot more research to do, so that statement is very preliminary. Maybe this belongs in the other thread?
Have a good night. 🙂
EDIT: The numbers are from NRSV; they may vary slightly in other translations.
Originally posted by Coletti
Sorry, Scripture says God does not lie. And how could he steal since he owns it all anyway. The point is the commandments were written by God to men, they were not written by God to God. God establishes morality for men by express what he commands us to do in obedience to him - he can not disobey himself. Saying God can commit murder is illogical.
Let's be clear: is God capable of committing murder and chooses not to? Or
by some sovereign design is it actually impossible for Him to commit the act (that is,
acts that would otherwise be murders in a human's hand is not a murder in God's hand)?
Nemesio
Originally posted by ivanhoeLOL.
That's a statement satan could have used in describing his relationship with the God of the Scriptures. In particular when I read your very cryptic and dodging first sentences I can't help thinking about God's adversary. Is it satan you "worship" ?
For someone who thinks that non-Catholics don't go to Heaven except by
mediation of Holy Mother Church, your resentment towards me certainly
gives the indication 'Thou protesteth too much!'
Are you a Satan worshiper in the guise of a Roman Catholic? Are you a
wolf in sheep's clothing?
That would be the biggest irony ever.
Nemesio
I thought I summed it up quite well with my statement. 🙁
Let's see...
The prevailing christian view is that this life is meant to for us to seek salvation and follow the orders of god.
That withstanding, once true belief, or I suppose a significant level, is achieved, one cannot care as much about his life or death with the prospect of going to heaven.
If you are an athiest, life is merely the ongoing process of evolution and the progress of the species, There really is not atachement to life for it surves no ultimate purpose in the grand scheme, and anything you wish to achieve will, be done so by another after your untimely death, unltimately ammount to nothing. This world collapses under the weight of economic and technological progress which will lead to environmental concerns with regards to food, water, shelter, energy, production and waste if our political differences don't kill us before the fact.
Deep space colonialization is a pipe dream, there is no forseeable way to produce a completely self-sustaining habitat as it requires some form of "free" or relatively abundundant energy. We also don't we see the effectiveness of the "solution" by delaying the extinction of the species due to the short lifespan of human beings and the costs of procreation. That aside, we've got bigger fish to fry before we even get there.
As for those who are neither "saved" nor deep space pioneers, we are the ones I pressume everyone is worried about. Either the souls are lost and eternally damned, or we're just cannon fodder and the price of progress.
It perhaps becomes a concern for those who wish to do god's work. But, it's rather unfortunate that most of the world either cannot or will not accept the word of the christian god, if it is even heard.
I'm sure that for those who fall under the definition of heathen will no doubt have heard the divine message and rejected it. It truly makes no sense to condemn those young, the feeble minded, and the old and ignorant, who lack the necessary skills to comprehend what is needed for salvation.
The heathens, a rather large population, is one that falls further into two or three categories.
One will be those who were misguided.
People who only received a messenger few and far between their time here, of which none were well equipped to deliver the message. For these, I can see no reason for damnation.
A second would be those who recieved the message, but rejected it for a "better" one.
These would not necessarily be godless people. They may indeed believe in many of the same things that those of the christian faith believe, but the inherent "defects" in the new faith have stopped them for some reason or another. This, again, may be entirely the fault of the messengers rather than the recipients. After all, there is no compulsion in matters of faith.
A third would be those who recieved the message, understood it, found no flaw, and still rejected it.
For these, I suppose there is no recourse. The only route that lies ahead is one to hell. Either through their continued way of life, or through a hypocritical acceptance of the faith through constant pressure to do so. A damned if you don't, damned further if you pretend to do sort of deal. Assuming there is a heaven and hell, I can only see this group as the one eternally damned. But, what are we to do if we can't change them.
So, to come full circle to my previous point, there is no importance to life.