Spirituality
08 Feb 15
Originally posted by sonshipYou just cannot see the clear anthropomorphising in the beginnings of these religions.So your god is not omniscient after all? If IT was, then IT would not have any enemies, would it.
I don't see why that should follow.
What I can say is that the enemies of God are a temporary matter.
Some will be reconciled and some will be defeated.
For now it is a temporary situation.
[quote]
I myself consider myself to be ...[text shortened]... te endeavor QUACKS would not exist anywhere. There is such comfort in bigoted generalizations.
You also cannot imagine humans capable of imagining, despite thousands of years of some truly awe inspiring works, the bible being just one of them.
My main charge is there was no deity involved in the creation of Judaism and in fact the genesis tale was copied from earlier Egyptian mythology, which I saw with my own eyes, the 6 day creation tale. Sure the names were changed to protect the innocent but the main fact was, early Jews just copied and pasted Egyptian mythology into their own culture.
Which makes sense since they lived among the Egyptians for a long long time so naturally they would have been brought up in the culture of the myth of the 6 day creation tale.
But the main critique is this:
A truly omniscient god intent on bringing religion to a world, you know a WHOLE world, would have in its power the ability to speak to every being on the planet at the same time.
You cannot deny that in your religion, a god speaks to some people. So this god could have spoken to SOME people all around the planet at the same time and yet supposedly concentrated on a small tribe in the middle of a desert, totally ignoring the entire rest of the planet. There will be people a thousand years from now who will grow up never having heard of Christianity, Judaism, or Islam.
That proves to me the local nature of the beginnings of your religion.
A hierarchical one at that. So why would a deity make that kind of religion in ONE place on a large planet, totally ignoring the rest of the world's human population?
My answer: Because it wasn't a deity who made Judaism or the rest, but just local people making up religion to control an unruly population who would have been guided by primitive notions of humanity, like slavery is ok, like it is ok to have many wives, like it is ok for women to be placed on a lower plane than men, that women could NEVER be in the upper realm of the religion.
Eliminating half the thinking ability is not a good thing at ANY time in human history.
We have seen what happens there many times in human history. Like the cultural revolution in I think 1968 in China, where anyone even wearing glasses was suspect and intellectuals were killed by the millions.
GREAT strategy. Kill the smart ones.
Or the way ISIS takes over, a woman doctor is now a bottle washer.
And those asssholes decide THEY can now be doctors, having taken a first aide course. So a lot of people died under the 'care' of these absolute asssholes who thought women were not worth the time of day, but only useful as a sex slave.
And of course you can say, THEY WERE NOT CHRISTIANS, but why don't you take a look at Christianity throughout history. Plenty of evidence women were tortured, burned at the stake and such and plenty of perversions of christianity in that time.
Even now, Christians are killing Hindu's in India BECAUSE they are Hindu.
And of course Hindu's are killing Christians BECAUSE they are Christian.
The whole setup STINKS to high heaven. STINKS of human construction.
You want to talk about the grace of Jesus and so forth, why don't you go to India and tell that to the Christians there so they stop killing Hindu's, eh?
Or the Christians who like to kill abortion doctors here in the US.
Or the Salvation Army who, when a down and out dude come in for help, starving, but is turned away from this supposedly Christian outfit, why? Because he was gay.
Doesn't sound very spiritual to me.
The whole artifice of religion is one phony tale after another.
The Anti-communist movement in the 1950's here in the US had a saying, about the communist empire:
Tell a lie, make it BIG ENOUGH, and people will believe.
That applies DIRECTLY to ALL human religions.
My fervent wish is for a REAL deity to show up on Earth and tell it like it REALLY is, not some trumped up BS tales of Human religions.
But that fantasy will never happen because, AT BEST, humans are some kind of deity sponsored experiment, strictly hands off, which was made EXTREMELY clear by the fact that 100 MILLION people were killed in WW2 by various despots and regimes.
This alleged god must have just shrugged its insubtantial shoulders and might have just as well have said, oh well, 100 million dead. There are lots more where THEY came from, the race needed thinning out anyway.
My wish would be you and others like you could just take a step back and look at the entire picture of religion on Earth. Maybe you would think differently about just how spiritual your religion really is.
And I know exactly how that would come out: Zero difference.
21 Feb 15
Originally posted by sonhouse"A truly omniscient god intent on bringing religion to a world, you know a WHOLE world, would have in its power the ability to speak to every being on the planet at the same time."
You just cannot see the clear anthropomorphising in the beginnings of these religions.
You also cannot imagine humans capable of imagining, despite thousands of years of some truly awe inspiring works, the bible being just one of them.
My main charge is there was no deity involved in the creation of Judaism and in fact the genesis tale was copied fr ...[text shortened]... iritual your religion really is.
And I know exactly how that would come out: Zero difference.
So what?
You seem to be saying if God didn't act the way I thought He would then
He isn't real. What makes you the standard that God must meet?
21 Feb 15
Originally posted by sonhouseWhy couldn't Joseph, being second in charge among the Eqyptians, brought that creation tale to them and the Eqyptians distorted it?
You just cannot see the clear anthropomorphising in the beginnings of these religions.
You also cannot imagine humans capable of imagining, despite thousands of years of some truly awe inspiring works, the bible being just one of them.
My main charge is there was no deity involved in the creation of Judaism and in fact the genesis tale was copied fr ...[text shortened]... iritual your religion really is.
And I know exactly how that would come out: Zero difference.
21 Feb 15
Originally posted by KellyJayA real god would have foreseen the issues resulting from having so many religions at each other's throats, killing millions in the name of these gods.
"A truly omniscient god intent on bringing religion to a world, you know a WHOLE world, would have in its power the ability to speak to every being on the planet at the same time."
So what?
You seem to be saying if God didn't act the way I thought He would then
He isn't real. What makes you the standard that God must meet?
So either it doesn't care, let the fighting commence, it is really entertaining or the whole thing was just made up by men.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by sonhouse
You just cannot see the clear anthropomorphising in the beginnings of these religions.
I think Genesis 1:26,27 about man being made in the image of God makes sense. There is nothing else on this planet quite like human beings.
Truth embellished, modified, perverted, and rehashed to meet local needs of thousands of tribes and thousands of societies which also speak anthropomorphically about Odin or Zeus, do not not mandate for me Genesis 1:26,27 is wrong.
I don't say Jesus Christ is not believable because the Jolly Green Giant is not believable. I find that lazy minded, reactionary, and making excuses with broad generalizations.
You also cannot imagine humans capable of imagining, despite thousands of years of some truly awe inspiring works, the bible being just one of them.
I can imagine humans capable of imagining from the time of Cain and Abel down to today.
My main charge is there was no deity involved in the creation of Judaism and in fact the genesis tale was copied from earlier Egyptian mythology,
Sounds intellectual.
I don't think I HAVE to go master Egyptian civilization before I enter into a intimate and sweet communion with Jesus Christ.
I don't think I have to have mastered Egyptians or Assyrian or Roman ancient history before I come to know and love my Heavenly Father.
What separeted me from the reality of God was my sins. It was not that I didn't know enough about ancient Egypt.
That's all the response I want to write this morning.
God was not real to me at one time. Now God is real to me.
The barrier was about what I had done - my sins.
The obstacle was not a whole lot of expertize on interesting subject matter yet not pertinent to WHY communion with the Holy Spirit was circumvented.
My SINS made God not real to me. It was not ignorance of Egyptology.
It was the need to confess to God that I was a hopeless and helpless sinner who needed the redeeming death and resurrection of Christ.
God is not real to you because you need the real guilt of your real SINS obliterated by receiving Christ.
All that stuff is interesting. But I wanted to have fellowship with my Father first off. And the isolation was not intellectual knowledge but the need to humble myself and admit I needed the Savior Jesus.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
In this discussion (?) I made the statement to RJhinds that YEC actually believe themselves in a very aggressive evolution after the flood of Noah.
I was asked to substantiate that.
I said that if I could not in a short time I would retract it.
I did retract it.
However, recently, I came across a probable source of this charge - that YEC does believe in a super efficient evolution to have happened after the Noah flood.
In this lengthy debate between Hugh Ross (OEC) and Danny Faulkner (YEC) around 1:56 Ross begins to talk about YEC's concept that animals became carnivorous after the flood of Noah. Ross claims that the YECs believe this happened by means of a very aggressive and efficient evolution process.
Around 1:56 or 1:57. Listen for about two to four minutes as Ross explains
Hugh Ross verses Danny Faulkner - How old is the Universe ?
( I do not agree with Ross's Day Age interpretation of Genesis 1. I believe in the Gap )
08 Mar 15
1 edit
Originally posted by sonshipHugh Ross has been wrong on other things and is hostile to young earth creationist Christians. There were no aggressive evolution occurring after Noah's flood. However, there was aggressive environmental adaptation because of God's command allowing man to eat certain animals for food and the resulting fear God put into the animals because of this sudden change. 😏
In this discussion (?) I made the statement to RJhinds that YEC actually believe themselves in a very aggressive evolution after the flood of Noah.
I was asked to substantiate that.
I said that if I could not in a short time I would retract it.
I did retract it.
However, recently, I came across a probable source of this charge - that YEC does bel ...[text shortened]... aMA
( I do not agree with Ross's Day Age interpretation of Genesis 1. I believe in the Gap )
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
08 Mar 15
2 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsHugh Ross is one of the most civil and respectful debaters of this matter you'll ever find.
Hugh Ross has been wrong on other things and is hostile to young earth creationist Christians. There were no aggressive evolution occurring after Noah's flood. However, there was aggressive environmental adaptation because of God's command allowing man to eat certain animals for food and the resulting fear God put into the animals because of this sudden change. 😏
I have not ONCE found him to belittle the opposite camp or say anything mean about them. He is always unflappable and respectful to the YEC side.
He is just too often better qualified.
I totally disagree with the word "hostile" describing Dr. Ross in his debates. He is NOT hostile. He does disagree. But his reasons are given in a respectful manner every single time I have heard or read his arguments.
The opposite is what I have seen. The nastiness, the vehemence I have seen is often on the side of Young Earthers toward Ross.
Let any observer watch the debate and see if they detect hostility from Ross. This particular debate was civil on both sides.
Your wrong there RJHinds.
But I kept my promises and did provide the source of what I knew I had heard.
And you seem to confirm it somewhat -
"there was aggressive environmental adaptation because of God's command allowing man to eat certain animals for food and the resulting fear God put into the animals because of this sudden ...
08 Mar 15
Originally posted by sonshipHugh Ross being destroyed by Kent Hovind and the audience
Hugh Ross is one of the most civil and respectful debaters of this matter you'll ever find.
I have not ONCE found him to belittle the opposite camp or say anything mean about them. He is always unflappable and respectful to the YEC side.
He is just too often better qualified.
I totally disagree with the word "hostile" describing Dr. Ross in his de ...[text shortened]... als for food and the resulting fear God put into the animals because of this sudden ... [/quote]
08 Mar 15
Originally posted by sonhouseI really say this too much, since it seems obvious to any thinking person.
A real god would have foreseen the issues resulting from having so many religions at each other's throats, killing millions in the name of these gods.
So either it doesn't care, let the fighting commence, it is really entertaining or the whole thing was just made up by men.
You are a sinful human. What makes you think you can know the mind of God? Your qualifications aren't up to that. It's "beyond your pay grade."
But of course, that doesn't stop you from presuming to judge God. Yes, this may be the one thing you have right, the arrogance of man. You're a shining example of that, at least.
08 Mar 15
1 edit
Originally posted by sonshipAmen! Testify, brother!You just cannot see the clear anthropomorphising in the beginnings of these religions.
I think [b]Genesis 1:26,27 about man being made in the image of God makes sense. There is nothing else on this planet quite like human beings.
Truth embellished, modified, perverted, and rehashed to meet local needs of thousands of tribes and ...[text shortened]... as not intellectual knowledge but the need to humble myself and admit I needed the Savior Jesus.[/b]
😀