WWJD? This is spot on!

Originally posted by scottishinnz
Again, avoiding the question.

IF [b]GOD TOLD YOU TO MURDER SOMEONE, WOULD YOU DO IT?[/b]

Can't you read ? The answer is NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
"So God isn't omnipotent then? He is bound by reason. And apparently, no free will on Gods part either, if he can't order you to kill someone."

Your interpretation of freedom is the liberal one of "doing what one pleases". I use the Christian interpretation of freedom "doing what is good".

If you choose doing "good" instead of "evil" you will be free.

How do you define what is "good" and what is "evil"?

Originally posted by scottishinnz
Isn't "good" just doing something the way God wants it done? In which case, anything God does is, by default, good.

Thus, your god is logically bound to not be able to do some things, irrespective.

"Isn't "good" just doing something the way God wants it done? In which case, anything God does is, by default, good."

No.

"Thus, your god is logically bound to not be able to do some things, irrespective."

Yes.

By the way he is not "my god", He is "God".

Originally posted by ivanhoe
Can't you read ? The answer is NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

So you would defy God?

Originally posted by ivanhoe
"Isn't "good" just doing something the way God wants it done? In which case, anything God does is, by default, good."

No.

"Thus, your god is logically bound to not be able to do some things, irrespective."

Yes.

By the way he is not "my god", He is "God".

Okay, you'll have to define good and evil then.


So, there are some things God can't do? SO much for omnipotence.

Oh, and he is your god, because he certainly isn't mine.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
"Isn't "good" just doing something the way God wants it done? In which case, anything God does is, by default, good."

No.

"Thus, your god is logically bound to not be able to do some things, irrespective."

Yes.

By the way he is not "my god", He is "God".

No, he is your God and your interpretation of him.

Now, would you be willing to die for your God?

How do you define what is "good" and what is "evil"?

Originally posted by Esoteric
How do you define what is "good" and what is "evil"?

I really have to go now, but if you want to find the answers from the perspective of the Roman-Catholic Church, you'll be able to find them in the "Cathechism of the Catholic Church":

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm

Check out part three "Life in Christ". It's about what we were talking about, freedom and good and evil.

I'll check in again tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. See ya .......

Originally posted by ivanhoe
I really have to go now, but if you want to find the answers from the perspective of the Roman-Catholic Church, you'll be able to find them in the "Cathechism of the Catholic Church":

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm

Check out part three "Life in Christ". It's about what we were talking about, freedom and good and evil.

I'll check in again tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. See ya .......

King Arthur; "Run away! Run away!"


Sir Robin; "Do you suppose it'd confuse him more if we ran away some more?"

Originally posted by scottishinnz
King Arthur; "Run away! Run away!"


Sir Robin; "Do you suppose it'd confuse him more if we ran away some more?"

Have you read what I proposed to read ?

Originally posted by ivanhoe
Maybe it would be a good thing you start with explaining what the meaning is of your first post. I have a strong impression you are aiming at certain people. Who are those people ? What is their interpretation of Jesus Christs' teachings in your view ? What are you trying to achieve with your post ? Who wrote your post ? You vehemently object a ...[text shortened]... use this technique yourself. Who wrote your cut and paste job and who do you think wrote mine ?

The meaning of my first post was to illustrate the wildly inappropriate priorities found among *many* church leaders today. I, of course, cannot speak to your church specifically; you would need to look into that yourself. I think, however, you are Catholic and I have always considered the Catholic Church to do things pretty well in terms of charity. Still, the expensive mutual admiration society that too many churches have become is disgusting and, in my opinion, antithetical to Christ’s teachings.

My goal with my original post (a cut and paste job) is to attempt to make people aware of this potential problem and maybe even address it in their own Church. I also posted it in an effort to berate Christians about all the effort the expend congratulating themselves over how "godly" they are. I do not know who wrote it.

TheSkipper

Originally posted by scottishinnz
Okay, you'll have to define good and evil then.


So, there are some things God can't do? SO much for omnipotence.

Oh, and he is your god, because he certainly isn't mine.

Not to intervene in your little party here but I would like to throw in my 2 cents. I think the term "evil" is to describe what God is not. Conversly, "good" is used to define what God is. For example, God is defined as the God of the living and a "good" God, therefore "evil" would logically have to pertain to things that have to do with the dying or spiritually dead. I am speaking only in Biblical terms. In regards to your own morality you may agree or disagree with such terms and how they are used in scripture if you like.

Originally posted by TheSkipper
The meaning of my first post was to illustrate the wildly inappropriate priorities found among *many* church leaders today. I, of course, cannot speak to your church specifically; you would need to look into that yourself. I think, however, you are Catholic and I have always considered the Catholic Church to do things pretty well in terms of charity. S ...[text shortened]... ongratulating themselves over how "godly" they are. I do not know who wrote it.

TheSkipper

My own pastor has made reference to such problems within the church. He said that some churches focus mostly on charity, as where some focus mostly on teaching, and some focus mostly on community etc. There seems to be a lack of balance within most churches. As far as the teaching goes in my church the teaching part gets a A+. In terms of charity we recently built a "community center" that is attached to our church with a free health clinic and legal service etc for the poor. The church also encourages people to get involved in ministries as an outreach to the general public. As far as community goes, they encourage home groups and actively participating in home groups so as to actually get to know people in your church. Don't know if this gives you any ideas for your own church but just wanted to share. I would say, however, that no church is perfect. Therefore I think the healthiest mindset in approaching church is to provide a constant atmosphere of reform and revival.

Originally posted by TheSkipper
The meaning of my first post was to illustrate the wildly inappropriate priorities found among *many* church leaders today. I, of course, cannot speak to your church specifically; you would need to look into that yourself. I think, however, you are Catholic and I have always considered the Catholic Church to do things pretty well in terms of charity. S ...[text shortened]... ongratulating themselves over how "godly" they are. I do not know who wrote it.

TheSkipper

"I think, however, you are Catholic and I have always considered the Catholic Church to do things pretty well in terms of charity. Still, the expensive mutual admiration society that too many churches have become is disgusting and, in my opinion, antithetical to Christ’s teachings."

I certainly hope people will evaluate church activities and in particular their own activities and (political and moral) stances in the perspective of what Christ teaches us.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
Have you read what I proposed to read ?

You refer and refer, leads us to some Roman Catholic stuff and still quote that you don't believe in the book, a priest or a building. It doesn't make sence to me.
What makes sence to me is that if one follows someone elses path, Jesus' in this case, one will never gain his wisdom. For he was a selfmade man. To come to this, one has to question, dig and rest and probably answer ones own questions. And that is just what The Skipper does.

Originally posted by Sake
You refer and refer, leads us to some Roman Catholic stuff and still quote that you don't believe in the book, a priest or a building. It doesn't make sence to me.
What makes sence to me is that if one follows someone elses path, Jesus' in this case, one will never gain his wisdom. For he was a selfmade man. To come to this, one has to question, dig and rest and probably answer ones own questions. And that is just what The Skipper does.

Since when do you speak on behalf of the Skipper ?

"What makes sence to me is that if one follows someone elses path, Jesus' in this case, one will never gain his wisdom. For he was a selfmade man."

If you want to go to Washington do you follow the signs pointing in the city's direction or do you "answer your own questions" ?