Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why do Christians make God out to be dumb?
Cynic1
Member (Idle past 6075 days)
Posts: 78
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 136 of 259 (100880)
04-19-2004 7:32 AM
Reply to: Message 135 by crashfrog
04-19-2004 7:08 AM


Are you implying that humans who are never exposed to language are intellectually ape-like? It's not that I don't believe you, but I have to see some studies on this. Even if it is true, God can still meaningfully talk to other Gods (don't tell me other Gods aren't Biblical), and perhaps angels and enlightened (maybe only dead) humans.
As soon as apes who know sign language can discuss philosophy or literature, I'll agree that they have human-scale consciousness. Until then, they are an image of us who cannot understand us on a meaningful level.
Ineffability may not be Biblical, but that doesn't mean anything. Contrary to popular belief, the Bible is not the only thing we have to understand God. I would recommend William James' The Variety of Religious Experience for a different approach. While you may not agree that religious/mystical experience imparts any real knowledge, it is just as valid of a way to gain supernatural insight as the Bible. For example, if God came to me in the form of a burning bush and told me that I had better switch from Coke to Pepsi, I would do so, regardless of what the Bible has to say in the matter.
I have quoted a relevant section of James in the PHILOSOPHY IS KING thread in Free for All. Post 55 on the fourth page if you are interested.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 7:08 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 8:01 AM Cynic1 has replied
 Message 148 by ramoss, posted 09-13-2004 6:13 PM Cynic1 has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 137 of 259 (100882)
04-19-2004 8:01 AM
Reply to: Message 136 by Cynic1
04-19-2004 7:32 AM


It's not that I don't believe you, but I have to see some studies on this.
On google I found an entire website about the phenomenon of "feral children", the appropriately-titled No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.feralchildren.com/en/index.php.
Obviously it's a complex subject, and the failure of feral children to achieve normal levels of cognition could simply be the result of the physical, social, and mental neglect and abuse commensurate with their situation. Nonetheless I think the phenomenon suggests much about the relationship of cognition and language, though it would be unscientific to suggest that there's anything conclusive here.
Even if it is true, God can still meaningfully talk to other Gods (don't tell me other Gods aren't Biblical),
Depends on what part of the Bible you're talking about. The Bible hardly presents a unified front on the subject of the existence of competing deities.
As soon as apes who know sign language can discuss philosophy or literature, I'll agree that they have human-scale consciousness.
You might be interested to know that human children actually lag slightly behind ape children of the same age in terms of spacial awareness and mental mapping - right up to age 3, which is about the point that the human child begins to absorb and use language. Again, not conclusive proof, but interesting.
(Would it surprise you to know that I'm an English major? )
Contrary to popular belief, the Bible is not the only thing we have to understand God.
Yes, I know. My point has never been to prove definitive statements about the character of God - after all, I don't even believe he exists - but rather to show that the Biblical model of God, specifically, is not consistent with reality as we experience it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Cynic1, posted 04-19-2004 7:32 AM Cynic1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by Cynic1, posted 04-19-2004 8:46 AM crashfrog has not replied

Cynic1
Member (Idle past 6075 days)
Posts: 78
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 138 of 259 (100887)
04-19-2004 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 137 by crashfrog
04-19-2004 8:01 AM


Feral children is a really interesting subject that I will definitely get into, thanks for the link.
quote:
Depends on what part of the Bible you're talking about. The Bible hardly presents a unified front on the subject of the existence of competing deities.
Very true, it's not like it's one book. I think we can agree that there is material there for multiple Gods though. Or for all we know there were multiple Gods for the OT, then one God achieved dominance as the other Gods lost worshippers. That’s way off topic though, as interesting as the speculation it may be to me.
quote:
You might be interested to know that human children actually lag slightly behind ape children of the same age in terms of spacial awareness and mental mapping - right up to age 3, which is about the point that the human child begins to absorb and use language. Again, not conclusive proof, but interesting.
Interesting, but I don't really even see it as evidence. The stupidity of human larvae (sorry, I hate small children, I'm a waiter) doesn't really mean anything about their potential. Some children advance more rapidly than others. Some kids never learn to read until school, some teach themselves at 3. The former can go on to become Nobel Prize winners, and the latter can become stand-up comics. Besides, children don't have the need to advance as rapidly as I would think would be helpful in wildlife.
quote:
(Would it surprise you to know that I'm an English major? )
Dude, you too? I have a handicap though, my mother was a journalism teacher/editor for Road and Track magazine. Her lessons don't seem to have taken completely, however, as I can be as long winded as Hawthorne. Do you have aspirations of being a writer, teacher, or fast food worker? Teacher for me (though obviously college level).
quote:
Yes, I know. My point has never been to prove definitive statements about the character of God - after all, I don't even believe he exists - but rather to show that the Biblical model of God, specifically, is not consistent with reality as we experience it.
I agree with what you say, I was just trying to show that it isn't a given that we can understand enough about Him to justify any model of Him, let alone judge its consistency with reality. I'm all for agreeing to disagree on this point though. Since my own beliefs don't hinge on consistency with reality, I see no reason to do the point to death.
Since we may have strayed from the original intent of the thread, I would enjoy picking up a discussion of some of our other points on a different one. Perhaps the ineffability of God, what being created in the image of God means, or even our cognitive relationship with apes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 8:01 AM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by SoulFire, posted 04-19-2004 6:16 PM Cynic1 has not replied

SoulFire
Inactive Member


Message 139 of 259 (100998)
04-19-2004 6:16 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by Cynic1
04-19-2004 8:46 AM


Thanks for taking over Cynic1, your doing a much better job than I could have. Keep it up.

"The Astonishing Hypothesis is that you -- your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules" -Francis Crick in The Astonishing Hypothesis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by Cynic1, posted 04-19-2004 8:46 AM Cynic1 has not replied

chicowboy
Inactive Member


Message 140 of 259 (125729)
07-19-2004 4:20 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by burntdaisy622
01-30-2004 3:02 PM


So he said, "Here. I will have my son die for you, for I can raise him from the dead, thus allowing me to raise you from the dead."
That's the Christian interpretation of millennia-old death and rebirth myths. The myth is not an original NT idea. It's no accident that Easter coincides with the spring equinox.
The Christian version fits in nicely with Abshalom's description of pastoral culture. The idea that someone has died for you leaves you with a sense of debt, duty, responsibility -- you owe it to God to obey Him; look what He did for you!
Strangely enough, one can view the origin of this myth, i.e., man's observation of the death and rebirth of crops with the seasons, as one of man's first attempts at science.
This message has been edited by chicowboy, 07-19-2004 03:27 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by burntdaisy622, posted 01-30-2004 3:02 PM burntdaisy622 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by portmaster1000, posted 07-19-2004 10:19 PM chicowboy has not replied

portmaster1000
Inactive Member


Message 141 of 259 (125800)
07-19-2004 10:19 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by chicowboy
07-19-2004 4:20 PM


Vernal Equinox
chicowboy writes:
It's no accident that Easter coincides with the spring equinox.
It's also interesting to observe that during this equinox the Sun is crossing the celestial equator in the constellation of Aries. An event that might be called "a lamb on a cross."
PM1K

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by chicowboy, posted 07-19-2004 4:20 PM chicowboy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by Amlodhi, posted 09-13-2004 8:17 PM portmaster1000 has replied

JRTjr
Member (Idle past 4306 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 142 of 259 (126863)
07-23-2004 2:26 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by berberry
01-30-2004 12:12 PM


The Firmament means the Upper atmosphere
Dear Berbarry,
The Firmament means the Upper atmosphere, and they not only Bump it when they escape in to space they actually pass thru it. Second, God’s concern was not that they might actually get in to heave through some mystical back door. He was concerned about their rebellion against His authority. {Rebellion against God’s authority is called sin.} Not what they build, rather why they built it.
A few questions:
Can you give me a few examples of these most implausible explanations?
If God wrote the code for DNA and is dumb, what would you consider smart?
If you do not mind, could you explain why you say that God is malevolent?
I, as a Christian, am here to tall you out right, with no apologies God is vary intolerant of sin. So intolerant, in face, that the death penalty is the only price God will except for it. (Romans 6: 23a) However, the Good News is that God, Himself, paid that penalty so we don’t have to. (Romans 6: 23b) All we must do is accept that He paid for our sin, and follow Him. (John 3: 16, 17)
, and they not only Bump it when they escape in to space they actually pass thru it. Second, God’s concern was not that they might actually get in to heave through some mystical back door. He was concerned about their rebellion against His authority. {Rebellion against God’s authority is called sin.} Not what they build, rather why they built it.
A few questions:
Can you give me a few examples of these most implausible explanations?
If God wrote the code for DNA and is dumb, what would you consider smart?
If you do not mind, could you explain why you say that God is malevolent?
I, as a Christian, am here to tall you out right, with no apologies God is vary intolerant of sin. So intolerant, in face, that the death penalty is the only price God will except for it. (Romans 6: 23a) However, the Good News is that God, Himself, paid that penalty so we don’t have to. (Romans 6: 23b) All we must do is accept that He paid for our sin, and follow Him. (John 3: 16, 17)
This message has been edited by jrtjr1, 07-23-2004 01:27 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by berberry, posted 01-30-2004 12:12 PM berberry has not replied

JRTjr
Member (Idle past 4306 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 143 of 259 (126866)
07-23-2004 2:36 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by sidelined
01-31-2004 12:50 PM


You have a few interesting points
Dear sidelined,
You have a few interesting points; but you make some assumptions that I believe are incorrect.
You start off saying there is no more real evidence for Satan than for God. Unless I am wrong, the implied assumption here is that you can prove or that it has been proven that there is not god. If you can prove there is not god, please, share your findings.
Second, You seem to be using only one definition of some words. Again, you state, God created the universe and everything in it then He also created evil.
Now, this statement was made about Christ Jesus, All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing made that was made. (John 1: 3)
So I would guess that the implied question here would be if God created evil, why are we held responsible for it? And in the society we live in today it seem a reasonable question.
In our society today, we want to put all the blame, for a curtain wrong or injustice, on one body or one person. Lets use the example of the breakup of a marriage.
He claims it was all her fault, and she blames him. So who is to blame? In our society, we will usually point the finger at one or the other, and say that, that person is to blame, or we’ll say it was no ones fault, it just happened. {Nothing it this Universe, just happens. We may never know the reason, this side of eternity, but there is a reason for everything that happens}
The Bible however, makes it clear that each of us has our own sin, and that we will be judged for our actions and inactions, thoughts, and even attitudes.
Not only will God Judge him for not keeping his marriage vows, he will Judge her for not keeping hers. But it does not stop even there, because, He will also Judge the nation that gave them an easy out (I.E. no fault divorces and the such), He will Judge the congregation (If the couple went to Church anywhere) for not supporting this family and warning them about getting a divorce, He will Judge their friends who stood by and said nothing, or worse encouraged the divorce, He will Judge the person or persons who were stepping out with the one that was stepping out; if indeed some one was stepping out.
Now, as to whether or not God is to blame.
Taking the verse I quoted above, there are those who say that If God Made everything, then He is responsible for everything. The connotation here is that I’m not responsible for my actions, God is. After all He made me that way. Well, for those who think that is how it goes, sorry, not.
Lets take two examples:
Mr. Ford built a company called Ford Motors.
Parents are responsible for their children’s actions.
In the first example we see that Mr. Ford is credited with building a company that today is one of the leading automobile manufacturers in the U.S.A., if not the world. Now would any one logically deduce from the above statement that Mr. Ford built, by him self, every single vehicle that came off the Ford assembly line? Of course not.
In the second example we see that a Parent is responsible for the actions of the children in their care. But that does not mean that the adult is necessarily to blame for the things the child has done.
God, like a great inventor is the author of all creation, that does not mean He Himself made the H.P. Laptop I’m writing this letter on. Nether does it mean that I am not to blame for my own misdeeds. As the One and True Father of all of creation, He alone has the right, and the authority, to correct His creation; for God disciplines those whom He loves. {Hebrews 12: 6}
Now, as to your last statement It is only through ignorance that you can fashion a "loving" God from the one in the Bible.
If you have read thus far, I hope you will read to the end. I would like to try to show you a Loving God from the Bible.
First I’d like to ask if you have actually read the Bible through? If not maybe you should. I would suggest that, if you decide to, you put aside any preconception you have about the Bible, religion, and Christianity. We all tend to look at thing through our own rose colored glasses; as thy say. I know I have, and then found out I was wrong.
Now, as to this Loving God. First, as others have pointed out It comes to a question of the definition of love.
Lets take I Corinthians 13 as a starting point.
1 Corinthians 13: 1 — 8
1If I [can] speak in the tongues of men and [even] of angels, but have not love (that reasoning, intentional, spiritual devotion such as is inspired by God’s love for and in us), I am only a noisy gong or a tinkling cymbal. 2And if I have prophetic powers (the gift of interpreting the Divine will and purpose), and understand all secret truths and mysteries, and possess all knowledge, and if I have [sufficient] faith so that I can remove mountains, but have not love (God’s love in me) I am nothing. (a useless nobody) 3 Even if I dole out all that I have [to the poor in providing] food, and if I surrender my body to be burned or in order that I may glory, but have not love (God’s love in me), I gain nothing.
4Love endures long and is patient and kind; love never is envious nor boils over with jealousy, is not boastful or vainglorious, does not display itself haughtily 5It is not conceited (arrogant and inflated with pride); it is not rude (unmannerly) and does not act unbecomingly. Love (God’s love in me) does not insist on its own rights or its own way, for it is not self-seeking; it is not touchy or fretful or resentful; it takes no account of the evil done to it [it pays no attention to a suffered wrong]. 6It does not rejoice at injustice and unrighteousness, but rejoices when right and truth prevail.
7Love bears up under anything and everything that comes, is ever ready to believe the best of every person, its hopes are fadeless under all circumstances, and it endures everything [without weakening].
8Love never fails [never fades out or becomes obsolete or comes to an end]. As for prophecy (the gift of interpreting the Divine will and purpose), it will be fulfilled and pass away; as for tongues, they will be destroyed and cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away [it will lose its value and be superseded by truth].
A few things I take from this:
Love is not an emotion
Love isn’t necessarily something you do or do not do.
Love is not self-serving
Love is an attitude
Now, how does the God of the Bible live up to His own definition of Love?
Lets take what ‘The Revenge of Reason’ said about God.
Do Christians even reflect on the things the Bible says? Take for example the thought process of this:
1) God creates Earth, man, animals, etc.
2) God tells Adam and Eve to not eat from the tree of knowledge
3) Duped by Satan they do in fact eat from the tree
4) Mankind is punished by God and original sin is introduced
5) God later appears on Earth in the shape of a man on the cross to absolve this sin
I must agree with Mr. Reason, if this were the whole story, it wouldn’t make much since. But, thank God, that’s just a brief overview. (And then he’s leaving a few things out.)
Lets go over the list again, but first lets take this into account; The Creator of the Universes planed out in infinite detail a way to create beiges in His own image, after His own likeness; Beiges capable of self-determination, creativity, and love.
For these creatures to truly have self-determination (better known as free will) they would have to be able to choose to not love God, as well as to love Him.
We go through the trials of this life to A) give us the choice of whether or not to love Him and B) if we choose to love Him, to perfect that love.
As a silver smith sits and watches the silver in the furnace till he can see his reflection in it, so God sits waiting to see the reflection of His Holiness in us.
Lets take up the question of sin. What is sin? I could list many, many scriptures to give you a detailed account of exactly what sin is, and what it is not. Don’t worry, I’m won’t. Simply put, sin is any action, thought, or attitude that does not conform perfectly to Gods Law. {Exodus 20, Mathew 22: 36 - 40}
If God did not allow a certain amount of rebellion, then how could we truly have self-determination? Having infinitely more knowledge, and wisdom then I posses The Creator of the universes knows exactly how much sin to allow before there’s to much, and how long to allow sin, before Judging it. This bring us back to ‘The Revenge of Reason’s comment.
1) God creates Earth, man, animals, etc.
{God creates a place where an eternal creation can take on a mortal form so that that eternal beige has a chance at redemption}
2) God tells Adam and Eve to not eat from the tree of knowledge
{God gives Adam (God called their name Adam (Geneses 5: 2), Adam call his wife Eve) the choice to obey Him}
3) Duped by Satan they do in fact eat from the tree
{Here again, it’s not just Satan’s fault, They would not have been tempted by what Satan said if they didn’t want what God had told them they could not have}
4) Mankind is punished by God, and original sin is introduced
{Vice versa, Adam sins; then God punishes them}
5) God later appears on Earth in the shape {form} of a man on the cross to absolve this sin
{God does not absolve sin. Sins price is death, God is Just, and will not allow sin to go unpunished. (Romans 6: 23a); He paid that price. All that is left is for each of us to decide whether we will accept the redemption God offers, or pay the penalty ourselves. (Romans 6: 23b, John 3: 16, 17)}
So here we have a Creator Who has graciously given His creation the choice of whether or not to love, and obey Him. He gave use a proving ground (this universe) so that we could be perfected. {Note: the angles were not given self-determination, or a proving ground. Therefore, when a third of them rebelled there was no chance for redemption or repentance.} We have a chance to repent, turn from our rebellion, and love God with all of our heart.
The sad fact is that, most of mankind will chose to deny God’s authority, His Love, and His Gift; After all, we want it our way, don’t we. People complain about a God that would send someone to hell. The problem is that God has done everything necessary, on His part, to keep us out of Hell. If anything we beg, plead, and downright demand to go to Hell. So though it breaks the hart of God, He allows use to go, but only after we’ve had every chance to escape its flames.
I would say, if God were unloving, and/or malevolent, He would send us to Hell the first time we did, said, or thought something that didn’t conform perfectly to His Law. God is not looking over your shoulder waiting for you to do something bad enough, or enough bad things, to send you to hell.
He is keeping you here long enough for you to make your final decision on whether or not you will yield your will to His; and God alone knows exactly how long that will take. God’s done everything necessary, except make the decision.
This message has been edited by jrtjr1, 08-13-2004 02:47 AM

John3: 16, 17

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by sidelined, posted 01-31-2004 12:50 PM sidelined has not replied

Spiritman.8m
Inactive Member


Message 144 of 259 (129228)
08-01-2004 1:45 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by sidelined
01-31-2004 12:50 PM


Why God desires Sacrifice & Freewill
God, who designed the right to choose your own way in life, gave opportunity to SET YOUR HEART ON HIM rather than things of the world or the Intellectual Pursuits around us. God chooses those who set their heart on Him, that is not mere religion. Religion gives man something physical and tangible to grasp on to, as in the O/T. But now a way has been made thru the Holy Spirit for a relationship thru our hearts directly to God via the Lord Jesus who directs our affairs based on Faith from Heaven. O/T sacrifices were a shadow of Jesus' death and a reminder of our imperfections that we need to submit to Him in order for Him to intervene in our lives. We make God out to be dumb by claiming rules and regulations. If you submit once again to the LAW you must fulfill the whole thing for Righteousness or trust in Him by Faith and you will be credited with Righteousness for what you do in obedience by His Spirit in good judgement in your heart. These are the true worshipers of God! He is the one who reveals Himself to you based on your Heart.

Spiritman.8m

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by sidelined, posted 01-31-2004 12:50 PM sidelined has not replied

JRTjr
Member (Idle past 4306 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 145 of 259 (133085)
08-12-2004 2:07 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by berberry
01-30-2004 12:12 PM


The mystical back door to Heaven
Dear Berbarry,
The Firmament means the Upper atmosphere, and they not only Bump it when they escape into space, they actually pass thru it. Second, God’s concern was not that they might actually get in to heaven through some mystical back door. He was concerned about their rebellion against His authority. {Rebellion against God’s authority is called sin.} It’s not what they built, that got them in to trouble, but rather why they built it.
A few questions:
Can you give me a few examples of these most implausible explanations?
If God wrote the code for DNA and is dumb, what would you consider smart?
If you do not mind, could you explain why you say that God is malevolent?
I, as a Christian, am here to tell you out right, with no apologies, that God is vary intolerant, of sin. So intolerant, in fact, that the death penalty is the only price God will except in payment for it. (Romans 6: 23a) However, the Good News is that God, Himself, paid that penalty so that we don’t have to. (Romans 6: 23b) All we must do is accept that He paid for our sin, and follow Him (I.E. stop rebelling against His rightful authority over us). (John 3: 16, 17)
Let me try to explain what I believe about the Bible.
It is not a book of history, though it contains historical facts. There are many references to historical events in the Bible. But the Bible spans more than six thousand years of history. In that context it has vary little history.
It is not a book of science, though there are scientific facts stated in it. Again, it’s purpose is not training in the scientific disciplines.
Though it is a book of literature, it is not a book of fiction or fairy tails. It’s purpose is not entertainment.
The Bible is not a religious book, meant only for the scholars who spend their lives arguing over what it means, and if it meant what it said.
The Bible, in short is a letter of love sent from God above. It tells us; who God is, what man is, why man is here, what our relation to Him is, and what He wants of us, from us, and for us.
If ever there was a problem that must be solved it is
what is my purpose in existence.
If there ever was a question that must be answered it is
Who am I.
If ever there was a hungry hart that needed to be filled,
it is the hart of a person with out God.
If ever there was a time to search for the truth, (the real truth)
it is now.
If ever there was a love that could fill to overflowing,
it is God’s.
If ever there was a hurt that could not be heals,
God can.
If ever a reason to rejoice, it is that God has heard my cry,
and changed the course of my life.
This is the essence of the Bible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by berberry, posted 01-30-2004 12:12 PM berberry has not replied

dpardo
Inactive Member


Message 146 of 259 (142079)
09-13-2004 3:00 PM


crashfrog wrote:
"Why does God allow Satan to exist? Either God allows Satan to persist because God is amoral (and therefore not good) or God is unable to stop him (and therefore not all-powerful.)
Again, the conclusion is inescapable: An all-powerful, benevolent God does not exist. God is either amoral, powerless, or altogether non-existent. That means it's up to us to bring justice to the world.
If somebody shoots you in the chest, you don't have any choices. You're just going to die. Their choice is going to affect you. There's no way around it. Their choice took away all your choices. If God's thing is that he maximises choice, why does he allow that to happen?"
If free-will exists, then some people will chose to do evil. If God intervenes at every single occurrence of evil, then that effectively nullifies free-will. It would also nullify faith, btw.
That said, God chooses to intervene sometimes in the evils that occur. For what purpose, we don’t always know.
In the Book of Acts, Saul had been on a mission to imprison Christians. He was interrupted, one day, while traveling, by Jesus himself. Jesus asked Saul [Acts 9:4]:
Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
Jesus then said in Acts 9:15 [referring to Saul]:
he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:
For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.
In this example, God chose to intervene in the evil plans of a person but we are privy to God’s purpose in doing so.
Most of the time, we can only guess at what God’s ultimate purpose in doing/allowing something is.

dpardo
Inactive Member


Message 147 of 259 (142082)
09-13-2004 3:21 PM


crashfrog wrote:
"Take on the role of an infinitely powerful, infinitely benevolent father figure. Let your very heart swell and burst with love for each and every human being under your care. Go on, really try.
Now, face the fact that one child every 7 hours will be the victim of murder in this country alone. The murderer will usually be someone they know. (This statistic is apparently based on data from 1994.)
Remember, you have infinite power and a whole lot of love, and there's a steady stream of dead kids. And you're telling me that your response would be no response, just like God?
I hate to bust out the "think of the children" argument, but it seems apt. Of all the people that should be thinking of the children, it's God."
I think one of the things that makes God’s purposes/plans difficult for us to understand is that we tend to see death as a finality. From God’s perspective, death is merely a transition. Please don’t take this to mean that God is not grieved, just as we are grieved.
In those situations you mentioned, the children go to Heaven.
As a parent, I would be very grieved if my child was murdered. But, I have the conviction that my child would be with God, in a far better place.

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by crashfrog, posted 09-14-2004 1:39 AM dpardo has not replied

ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 148 of 259 (142148)
09-13-2004 6:13 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by Cynic1
04-19-2004 7:32 AM


Deleted
This message has been edited by ramoss, 09-13-2004 05:14 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Cynic1, posted 04-19-2004 7:32 AM Cynic1 has not replied

Amlodhi
Inactive Member


Message 149 of 259 (142171)
09-13-2004 8:17 PM
Reply to: Message 141 by portmaster1000
07-19-2004 10:19 PM


Re: Vernal Equinox
quote:
Originally posted by portmaster1000
It's also interesting to observe that during this equinox the Sun is crossing the celestial equator in the constellation of Aries. An event that might be called "a lamb on a cross."
Indeed it is; or, rather, was. This celestial cross is known as the "first point in Aries". However, due to the phenomenon of equinoctial precession, c. 2000 years ago this point crossed into the constellation of Pisces. Some might say that the "lamb" died on that cross when the age of Pisces began; (which age Christians currently celebrate by sticking little fish on the back of their cars).
quote:
The vernal equinox (near March 21) occurs when the Sun crosses the celestial equator moving northward. The right ascension (i.e., the projection of lines of longitude onto the sky) at the vernal equinox was originally located in the constellation Aries, and this point of crossing was known as the first point in Aries. As a result of precession, the vernal equinox now actually occurs when the sun is in the constellation in Pisces.
Equinox -- from Eric Weisstein's World of Astronomy
Iam redit et Virgo, reduent Saturnia regna
"Now the Virgin returns, the reign of Saturn returns,
now a new generation descends from heaven on high.
Only do thou, pure Lucina, smile on the birth of the child,
under whom the iron brood shall first cease,
and a golden race spring up throughout the world."
Vergil, 4th Eclogue: c. 39 b.c. at the changing of the age.
Amlodhi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by portmaster1000, posted 07-19-2004 10:19 PM portmaster1000 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 150 by portmaster1000, posted 09-13-2004 11:42 PM Amlodhi has not replied

portmaster1000
Inactive Member


Message 150 of 259 (142248)
09-13-2004 11:42 PM
Reply to: Message 149 by Amlodhi
09-13-2004 8:17 PM


Re: Vernal Equinox
Thanx for adding more info, Amlodhi. I had forgotten about the precession when writing that post.
PM1K

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by Amlodhi, posted 09-13-2004 8:17 PM Amlodhi has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024