This is incontrovertible proof that God is evil. God does not live by his own golden
This is incontrovertible proof that God is evil. God does not live by his own golden rule.
God kills when he could just as easily cure. This is irrefutable.
This is a clear violation of the golden rule. The golden rule as articulated by Jesus.
God then is clearly evil.
Do you agree with Jesus that anyone who breaks the golden rule is evil?
Regards
DL
"If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him? Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets." - Matthew 7:11-12
The purpose of Jesus giving "The Golden Rule" is to tell His followers to love others with a giving, proactive love, to treat people as they would want to be treated. Like any of God's commandments, God doesn't have to follow them Himself. For example:
- God killing and people cold-blooded murdering others are different: God is The Creator of life, and He can transport a soul or souls from this life to the next as He sees fit; people can't make that call.
- Mark 3:1-6 is an account of Jesus, God in the flesh, healing on the Sabbath, which was supposed to be a day of resting from works. As Lord of the Sabbath, Jesus could heal/work.
If your parents gave you a bedtime of 9pm when you were a kid, does that mean they have to go to bed at the same time or they were breaking the rule? No. Same with God, only on a much grander scale; His laws are not greater than Him, they are meant to govern humanity.
Also, The Bible has different covenants, all with different things that apply to a person, people in general, or a specific people group. Like, say, The Old Covenant/Testament practice of Israel making animal sacrifices for sins was fulfilled for all time by Jesus Christ, The Lamb of God, offering Himself once and for all as The Payment for the sins of all mankind (Hebrews 2:9; 2:17; 4:14-16; 5:6; 7:26-27; 9:12).
Three links to consider man, and I'm citing them because I used them for information in the preceding paragraph:
https://gotquestions.org/God-heal-everyone.html
https://gotquestions.org/Golden-Rule.html
https://www.str.org/articles/does-god-have-to-obey-the-ten-commandments#.WDs-IdI0Pcs
I'm a believer in Christ, so please feel free to message me if you have any questions. I'm not saying I'll know every answer, but we can have a civil, positive dialogue for real.
Originally posted by Surtur
Why did god give us such fragile bodies? Where are the super powers? The angels got super powers.Here I am, a person with just one face, when I could have been given four faces..one of which is a lion.
I'll see what answers I can give you Surtur, and, yes, I'd like superpowers too haha.
"Why did God give us such fragile bodies?"
God did not originally: the bodies of Adam and Eve were immortal. Their choice to disobey God in The Garden of Eden/The Fall of Man (Genesis 3) caused them to become sinners and make humanity inherit sin nature (Romans 5:12).
"Where are the super powers?"
One of the commands God gave Adam in Genesis 1:28 concerning being a steward of the earth and its natural resources was to "subdue it". Adam was alive/a contemporary of both Methusaleh and Lamech (Noah's grandfather and father, respectively): people were long-lived before the flood, and then the life expectancy of the patriarchs started to decline. Moses lived to be only 120 years, but he still had the same physical capabilities as when he was in his youth (Deuteronony 34:7). People like Samson, who had superhuman strength, were special cases (in Samson's case, he was a Nazarite and had to fulfill a Nazarite vow; when Delilah cut his hair, he had broken his vow and at the same time turned his back on God, thus he lost his strength).
"Here I am, a person with just one face, when I could have been given four faces..one of which is a lion."
The four faces represent different aspects of Jesus:
- Lion - Gospel of Matthew = Jesus' Kingship
- Ox - Gospel of Mark = Jesus' Servitude
- Man - Gospel of Luke = Jesus' Humanity
- Eagle - Gospel of John = Jesus' Divinity/Godhood
Also, anyone who believes/trusts in Jesus Christ as The Payment for their sins will have a resurrected body that is physically "superhuman" one day (1 Corinthians 15:35-54).
Re: This is incontrovertible proof that God is evil. God does not live by his own golden
Originally posted by Greatest I am
This is incontrovertible proof that God is evil. God does not live by his own golden rule.God kills when he could just as easily cure. This is irrefutable.
This is a clear violation of the golden rule. The golden rule as articulated by Jesus.
God then is clearly evil.
Do you agree with Jesus that anyone who breaks the golden rule is evil?
Regards
DL
The god of the bible is man-made, therefore he is a reflection of both good and bad, just like humans.
Re: Re: Re: Re: This is incontrovertible proof that God is evil. God does not live by his own golden
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
man-mademade or caused by human beings (as opposed to occurring or being made naturally); artificial.
If The God of The Bible is The One who inspired these human beings to write His Word, He is not made up.
Also, the 66 individual books that comprise The Bible were written by over 40 authors, over 1600+ years, on 3 separate continents, yet The Bible is without contradiction, and has a single central character (Jesus Christ) and theme (His redemptive work on all men's behalf). The Quran, The Book of Mormon, the Jehovah's Witnesses' version of The Bible, the New World Translation, were either written by one man (Muhammed or Joseph Smith in the first two's case) or a group of people (Watchtower's translation team), yet have contradictions and/or anachronisms that compromise the integrity of the work. So, if say, Muhammed couldn't get 100% accuracy within his own writing of the Quran, which took him 22 years to complete, yet 40+ authors over 1600+ years did get 100% accuracy and agreement in The Bible, reason dictates something, or Someone, was guiding The Bible authors' efforts.
The issue is with saying that the Catholic Church, any Gnostic group, or another XYZ group wrote it is that these groups is that both:
A) Their doctrines and teachings don't line up with what is in The Bible, yet they supposedly wrote it. For example, Catholicism adopted celibacy of the priesthood (by the way, The New Testament/Covenant did away with the priesthood) and not eating meat during portions of Lent, yet 1 Timothy 3:1-4 outright declares making those acts mandatory rules to follow are "doctrines of devils".
B) These groups either came 3 or more centuries after Jesus, or opposed Him and/or His Word/teachings when He walked the earth. For example, Gnostics were Rabbinic Jews - those that made The Old Testament Scriptures EQUAL to oral tradition - not Kairite Jews - The Scriptures alone are God's authoritative Word.
And yes, Lucien, they are dead, but you bring up a good thought: the men who wrote The Bible were just like you and me and everyone else (save Christ), sinners. Noah was a drunk. Moses a murderer. Peter denied Christ 3 times. In the case of Moses, he is the one who wrote his own failings in Exodus - Deuteronomy. Same with Solomon, Jonah, Paul, and really most of the writers of The Old and New Testaments. All heels. All failures. But all who believed in God, and He used them.
Also, let's take The Apostles: all of them could have gone back to being loved by the community, successful in their careers, free from constant endangerment by people wanting to kill them for preaching The Gospel. If fact, Simon Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, James, John, and two more disciples were doing just that before Jesus appeared to them (John chp. 21). But seeing Jesus risen from the dead changed them; they all died horrible deaths (except John, who was sent into exile on Patmos) instead of living out peaceful lives in order to preach The Gospel, Jesus' work on our behalf.
I mean I get it guys: I was a Catholic for 17+ years. Born into it. First communion. Confirmation. Learned it pretty well. Was skeptical of how The Bible could be God's Word. I knew of Jesus, but finally one day actually believed on Him and knew Him from that day onward.
But good discussion so far, it's beneficial to me and hopefully to you all as well.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is incontrovertible proof that God is evil. God does not live by his own go
Originally posted by John Murdoch
If The God of The Bible is The One who inspired these human beings to write His Word, He is not made up.
Originally posted by John Murdoch
Also, the 66 individual books that comprise The Bible were written by over 40 authors, over 1600+ years, on 3 separate continents, yet The Bible is without contradiction,
Originally posted by John Murdoch
and has a single central character (Jesus Christ) and theme (His redemptive work on all men's behalf). The Quran, The Book of Mormon, the Jehovah's Witnesses' version of The Bible, the New World Translation, were either written by one man (Muhammed or Joseph Smith in the first two's case) or a group of people (Watchtower's translation team), yet have contradictions and/or anachronisms that compromise the integrity of the work. So, if say, Muhammed couldn't get 100% accuracy within his own writing of the Quran, which took him 22 years to complete, yet 40+ authors over 1600+ years did get 100% accuracy and agreement in The Bible, reason dictates something, or Someone, was guiding The Bible authors' efforts.
Originally posted by John Murdoch
The issue is with saying that the Catholic Church, any Gnostic group, or another XYZ group wrote it is that these groups is that both:
Originally posted by John Murdoch
A) Their doctrines and teachings don't line up with what is in The Bible, yet they supposedly wrote it. For example, Catholicism adopted celibacy of the priesthood (by the way, The New Testament/Covenant did away with the priesthood) and not eating meat during portions of Lent, yet 1 Timothy 3:1-4 outright declares making those acts mandatory rules to follow are "doctrines of devils".
Originally posted by John Murdoch
B) These groups either came 3 or more centuries after Jesus, or opposed Him and/or His Word/teachings when He walked the earth. For example, Gnostics were Rabbinic Jews - those that made The Old Testament Scriptures EQUAL to oral tradition - not Kairite Jews - The Scriptures alone are God's authoritative Word.
Originally posted by John Murdoch
And yes, Lucien, they are dead, but you bring up a good thought: the men who wrote The Bible were just like you and me and everyone else (save Christ), sinners. Noah was a drunk. Moses a murderer. Peter denied Christ 3 times. In the case of Moses, he is the one who wrote his own failings in Exodus - Deuteronomy. Same with Solomon, Jonah, Paul, and really most of the writers of The Old and New Testaments. All heels. All failures. But all who believed in God, and He used them.
Originally posted by John Murdoch
Also, let's take The Apostles: all of them could have gone back to being loved by the community, successful in their careers, free from constant endangerment by people wanting to kill them for preaching The Gospel. If fact, Simon Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, James, John, and two more disciples were doing just that before Jesus appeared to them (John chp. 21). But seeing Jesus risen from the dead changed them; they all died horrible deaths (except John, who was sent into exile on Patmos) instead of living out peaceful lives in order to preach The Gospel, Jesus' work on our behalf.
Originally posted by John Murdoch
I mean I get it guys: I was a Catholic for 17+ years. Born into it. First communion. Confirmation. Learned it pretty well. Was skeptical of how The Bible could be God's Word. I knew of Jesus, but finally one day actually believed on Him and knew Him from that day onward.But good discussion so far, it's beneficial to me and hopefully to you all as well.
Originally posted by John Murdoch
TL;DR - Christianity being legit is based on if The Bible is 100% true or not. If it isn't, it falls. But there is evidence to consider that proves The Bible, and, thus, Christianity are true.
I have not seen this proof. What people have claimed was proof, most often is circular logic.
Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.
Shakyamunison, what would you say to these links right here:
https://www.gotquestions.org/Constantine-Bible.html
https://www.gotquestions.org/council-of-Nicea.html
https://www.gotquestions.org/origin-Catholic-church.html
What about that history shows that after Catholicism became the official religion of the Roman Empire, it persecuted true Biblical Christians under the guise of "Christianity" being the state religion in Fox's Book of Martyrs? I mean, Catholicism does not follow the doctrines of The Bible, and has its roots in mingling paganism and Christianity.
Also, all contradictions go back to looking at a passage in context within in The Bible.
What proof would you need? I mean you obviously affirm that Constantine existed. What about the other Caesars? Alexander? We have more manuscript evidence for the texts in The Old and New Testaments than any other document, plus historians like Josephus and Tactitus (Jewish and Roman, respectively) that attest that Jesus and His followers existed. Can we not trust those but trust the histories of others that spoke of leaders like Alexander and the Caesars? What about George Washington?
Originally posted by John Murdoch
Shakyamunison, what would you say to these links right here:https://www.gotquestions.org/Constantine-Bible.html
https://www.gotquestions.org/council-of-Nicea.html
https://www.gotquestions.org/origin-Catholic-church.htmlWhat about that history shows that after Catholicism became the official religion of the Roman Empire, it persecuted true Biblical Christians under the guise of "Christianity" being the state religion in Fox's Book of Martyrs? I mean, Catholicism does not follow the doctrines of The Bible, and has its roots in mingling paganism and Christianity.
Catholics are Christian. Just because they do not believe in your interpretation of the bible does not mean they are not Christians.
I assume you are a Proustian because you sound like one (but I could be wrong). That means your denomination of Christianity came from the Catholic Church. Unless you are a Coptic Christian, but you don't sound like one to me.
The idea that somehow your religion is separate is a relatively new idea, that is wrong.
Originally posted by John Murdoch
Also, all contradictions go back to looking at a passage in context within in The Bible.What proof would you need? I mean you obviously affirm that Constantine existed. What about the other Caesars? Alexander? We have more manuscript evidence for the texts in The Old and New Testaments than any other document, plus historians like Josephus and Tactitus (Jewish and Roman, respectively) that attest that Jesus and His followers existed. Can we not trust those but trust the histories of others that spoke of leaders like Alexander and the Caesars? What about George Washington?
Just because Jesus DID exist doesn't mean that the Jesus of the bible was real. Most of the stories of Jesus in the bible were fused with Mithras who's story is similar in many key ways.
The way to determine if history is correct, is to look at multiple sources for information.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Catholics are Christian. Just because they do not believe in your interpretation of the bible does not mean they are not Christians.I assume you are a Proustian because you sound like one (but I could be wrong). That means your denomination of Christianity came from the Catholic Church. Unless you are a Coptic Christian, but you don't sound like one to me.
The idea that somehow your religion is separate is a relatively new idea, that is wrong.
But that's just it: The Bible is the standard for Christianity. 2 Peter 1:20-21 talks about that ("...that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."😉 What I'm saying is that the Catholic Church sets themselves up as the authority on Biblical matters, but yet history and The Bible itself disproves that.
I understand that you think that is circular reasoning, but it is not. The Catholic Church claims they are the one true church that Jesus founded in Jerusalem, but when put under the microscope for what determines a true church (The Bible), their history, actions, and doctrines all prove that they are not. Again, you may not believe that The Bible is legit, but the Catholic Church says it is, and that their following it, but yet they aren't. They can't have their cake and eat it too in this instance. Their taking a test, and they've got the cheat sheet, yet they've still got the wrong answers.
I mean, it's not a knock against you in anyway, Shakyamunison. In fact I appreciate the discussion. But Catholicism and the papacy has warred against The Bible and Christians in some way, shape, or form since its foundations.
Independent Baptist man, but was a Catholic for the first 17+ years of my life. I believed upon Christ just before I was 18.
Originally posted by John Murdoch
But that's just it: The Bible is the standard for Christianity. 2 Peter 1:20-21 talks about that ("...that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."😉 What I'm saying is that the Catholic Church sets themselves up as the authority on Biblical matters, but yet history and The Bible itself disproves that.
Originally posted by John Murdoch
I understand that you think that is circular reasoning, but it is not. The Catholic Church claims they are the one true church that Jesus founded in Jerusalem, but when put under the microscope for what determines a true church (The Bible), their history, actions, and doctrines all prove that they are not. Again, you may not believe that The Bible is legit, but the Catholic Church says it is, and that their following it, but yet they aren't. They can't have their cake and eat it too in this instance. Their taking a test, and they've got the cheat sheet, yet they've still got the wrong answers.
Originally posted by John Murdoch
I mean, it's not a knock against you in anyway, Shakyamunison.
Originally posted by John Murdoch
In fact I appreciate the discussion. But Catholicism and the papacy has warred against The Bible and Christians in some way, shape, or form since its foundations.
http://mbbc.us/resource/bibleanswers.pdf
Check out the "Church" section.
What do you mean by Predestines?