Originally posted by Genesis-Soldier
murder is an act of man ( i say this but i do not hold man to be the center of all things)murder is usally characterized along the lines of "a person or persons killed by another individual or group of individuals against the first person/persons/ "victims"/ will to live"
murder is just a cause of death enacted by another against the Victims/ prey's will to live. humans killing humans call it murder. in the animal kingdom we call it predatory chain/hierarchy. you could debate that we are better then animals but honestly i don't see us as better, just diffrent in self modelled and developed aspects of life and evolution
That does not tell us what adjectives you would use to differentiate from something desirable/good and something not desirable/evil.
As I said above, I am not surprised you could not describe your position or come up with an adjective.
That is often the case when someone is trying to develop a new tern when discarding common language.
I think it just shows a lack of ability to communicate properly.
Regards
DL
This has to be the worst case of criticism and defense of the Bible I've ever seen.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That is one of the main problems with Christian mythology.
Originally posted by Greatest I am
A worthy God would protect his own and not let harm come their way.
It's not moral for a judge to let a murderer go free just because it would be convenient for the murderer.
Originally posted by Astner
...You might want to check up the differences between Christianity and Christian mythology on Google before continuing making a fool out of yourself.
From Google:
Chris·ti·an·i·ty
noun: Christianity
the religion based on the person and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, or its beliefs and practices.
Christian mythology
is the body of myths associated with Christianity. Mythology refers to the collected myths of a group of people—the body of stories which they tell to explain nature, history, and customs.
Yes, I was talking about Christian mythology. However, I have no idea what you are talking about. It is most likely some labored slipping of hairs. Like when some Christians try to tell me that Catholics are not Christian.
Originally posted by Genesis-Soldier
the form of god is seen as divine, what do you judge to be worthy?why does a devine being need to "protect" or be bound to human/ natural "laws"/morals
You will have to rephrase your first for me. I am not sure of what you mean.
As to your last, if God sees it as his duty to punish like a parent does to a child, then as a parent, it is also his duty to protect.
A parent that only punishes and does not protest is not a worthy parent or Gods.
He has bound us to his laws and morals by promising to send the vast majority od us to hell for not following them as he sees fit.
Regards
DL
Originally posted by Astner
This has to be the worst case of criticism and defense of the Bible I've ever seen.You might want to check up the differences between Christianity and Christian mythology on Google before continuing making a fool out of yourself.
According to what morals? Certainly not absolute morality which is advocated by the Bible. The Bible is very clear on that everyone is a sinner and deserves to die for it.
It's not moral for a judge to let a murderer go free just because it would be convenient for the murderer.
It was not moral for God as judge to set and accept a bribe to corrupt his judgement that usually says the guilty should be punished and not the innocent when he demanded the murder of his innocent son either.
If we are all sinners as you say, why is God creating us this way if we are not what he wants?
No free will B.S. please.
Christians are always trying to absolve God of moral culpability in the fall by whipping out their favorite "free will!", or “ it’s all man’s fault”.
That is "God gave us free will and it was our free willed choices that caused our fall. Hence God is not blameworthy."
But this simply avoids God's culpability as the author of Human Nature. Free will is only the ability to choose. It is not an explanation why anyone would want to choose "A" or "B" (bad or good action). An explanation for why Eve would even have the nature of "being vulnerable to being easily swayed by a serpent" and "desiring to eat a forbidden fruit" must lie in the nature God gave Eve in the first place. Hence God is culpable for deliberately making humans with a nature-inclined-to-fall, and "free will" means nothing as a response to this problem.
If all sin by nature then, the sin nature is dominant. If not, we would have at least some who would not sin.
As a Universalist, I think that if God punishes any of those he created for being as he created us, then he is a vile satanic prick of a God.
Regards
DL
to Greatest AM I
my first was in relation to ignoring what you wanted good and evil to defined as in an adjective form. they are simple worded opposites. up has down, left has right and in this case "good" has "evil"
i simply do not believe there is "good" nor "evil". just actions with what we judge to be Beneficial outcomes or Damaging (damaging in anysense)
Originally posted by Genesis-Soldier
to Greatest AM Imy first was in relation to ignoring what you wanted good and evil to defined as in an adjective form. they are simple worded opposites. up has down, left has right and in this case "good" has "evil"
i simply do not believe there is "good" nor "evil". just actions with what we judge to be Beneficial outcomes or Damaging (damaging in anysense)
We are basically in agreement. Good and evil are not adequate to describe the human condition. That is way I prefer the Ten Worlds. It is far superior to the old good and evil fairytale.
Originally posted by Genesis-Soldier
to Greatest AM Imy first was in relation to ignoring what you wanted good and evil to defined as in an adjective form. they are simple worded opposites. up has down, left has right and in this case "good" has "evil"
i simply do not believe there is "good" nor "evil". just actions with what we judge to be Beneficial outcomes or Damaging (damaging in anysense)
I understand your position and just see it as semantics.
Most define actions with what we judge to be Beneficial outcomes or Damaging as good and evil
Using more words does not change the meaning that the vast majority give to good or evil.
You ere trying to re-write the dictionary and just looking silly.
Regards
DL
Originally posted by Greatest I am
I understand your position and just see it as semantics.Most define actions with what we judge to be Beneficial outcomes or Damaging as good and evil
Using more words does not change the meaning that the vast majority give to good or evil.
You ere trying to re-write the dictionary and just looking silly.
Regards
DL
I find this to be hypocritical. You redefine the Christian God on most of your posts, and now you chastise someone for redefining good and evil.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I find this to be hypocritical. You redefine the Christian God on most of your posts, and now you chastise someone for redefining good and evil.
I do not redefine the Christian God as so much criticize his ways.
I have said that God should be defined as rules and laws though if that is what you are talking about.
I do not see redefining adjectives that are well accepted as being quite the same thing. Especially when just redefine with synonyms.
To me that is just useless semantics.
Regards
DL
Originally posted by Greatest I am
I do not redefine the Christian God as so much criticize his ways.I have said that God should be defined as rules and laws though if that is what you are talking about.
I do not see redefining adjectives that are well accepted as being quite the same thing. Especially when just redefine with synonyms.
To me that is just useless semantics.
Regards
DL
I don't really mind if you define (redefine) god as described in the bible, but most people don't really read the bible. So, from their point of view, you are redefining their god (even if their god is not the god in the OT). Genesis-Soldier, has redefined good and evil in the same you, and so have I. Good and evil is an old tool that doesn't work, and it never has.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I don't really mind if you define (redefine) god as described in the bible, but most people don't really read the bible. So, from their point of view, you are redefining their god (even if their god is not the god in the OT). Genesis-Soldier, has redefined good and evil in the same you, and so have I. Good and evil is an old tool that doesn't work, and it never has.
It has for me.
It is a good and fast way to define what I like.
What is easier to comprehend for you if I were to use my word or the phrase our friend used to describe good?
---------------
Eating this steak is good is what I would say if asked if I liked eating it if not just answering, yes.
Compare to what our friend would say.
Eating this steak is an action that we judge to have a beneficial outcome.
Who sounds more human and who sound like Data from Star Trek?
This is my last word on this idiocy. I am not here to analyse language or rewrite Webster.
Regards
DL
Originally posted by Star428
Sunday is not the Sabbath day. It never was. The seventh day is the Sabbath. Not the dawn of a new week. Regardless of whether or not that was the day that Christ rose from the dead. However, Sunday is sometimes referred to as "The day of the Lord" since that is supposedly the day he rose. But, it's still not the Sabbath though. God, during the era you're referring to, would not be offended or insulted by anyone working on Sunday because it's not the seventh day and it never was.
Okie dokie, so maybe some of them worked a 7day week one time and bam, Wrath of God.
Not even gonna bother replying to all the idiots who think God was ever an "evil murdering bastard" since it would just be a waste of my time. Seems people still haven't learned the true definition of murder. Punishing the guilty is not murder.
No see murdering everyone on the planet except one guy and animals goes a step beyond mere punishment. This thing came one death away from total genocide. You realize that, right?
Just face it, the best case scenario is that God is an arrogant douchebag. In other words, God is that one jock from high school that was an utter d-bag to everyone but was still popular for some reason.
Keep in mind this is the same batshit insane religion that says you are GUILTY of..something, just by the mere fact you exist.