I believe in a creator,however i don't believe in naming it as in property.I am What i am. not man not woman just creator. I thank him always for creating the world.I try to emulate the creator by being good to others, ineed no book to tell me that.and i sure don't need the sunday(comics) preachers on tv , who KNOW what god wants. I have the confidence if i sin i will feel guilt, and try not to repeat it.etc etc.As for my soul? where will it go after the body is gone? I don't know, but if i dealt fairly while on earth,then i expect fairness in return. Eg. if mother teresa was a buddist and still led the life she did,should go to a good place if there is one.if not then shame shame on your belief.have a nice day....

I was talking about the American Heart Association.. not me..
I dont think it to be illogical.. but they do.. sorry if I stated that incorrectly... but do you see how easy it is to get the wrong understanding about something?

JIMR, I KNOW the book is fictional, but, and I QUOTE:

"All descriptions of artwork, architecture, DOCUMENTS. and secret rituals in this novel are accurate."

That is why I included the excerpt.

Stopping an evil act does not remove “any and all free will”. How ludicrous.

Consider an example: Let’s say that God made a minor twist to our brains so that planning to kill a child would cause one to stop breathing. A single new neural pathway with a couple of dozen cells would be all that would be needed. You could still think or do everything else you can do now, but thinking of doing this crime would cease your breathing until you abandoned the thought. I’ve personally never even considered such a heinous plan, so the curtailment of my actual personal free will would be zero – I’d be as free as I am now. I doubt that you would regret losing the ability to murder a child as well.

Same essential free will, with less evil in the world. If he were shy, God could even make this new brain feature it look like an evolutionary artifact – not murdering their own children would contribute to a population’s odds of survival.

An all-powerful, all-benevolent God should have designed us that way in the first place – but no, somehow he missed it. A reasonable conclusion is that either God doesn’t exist, or, he didn’t design us, or, he is a lousy designer, or, that he is not so powerful, or, that he is not so benevolent. Pick your favorite – and the underpinnings of xianity are demolished.



Oh, yummy – better than bacon - I can’t WAIT to see what convolutions and permutations you devise to bend the plain language of scripture to your will. Have at it!



Honey, the point is that the utility of religion is nil if it leads to such evils. A murderer who saves a life in an unrelated act is still a murderer. I’d love to engage God directly (if he existed) but he only shows his imaginary self through the acts of his followers. Speaking of which…here’s another fun one:

In the 14th century, the religious in Europe began systematically exterminating cats, which were thought to be in league with witches and the devil – an infallible Pope even ordered it, I've heard. The lack of cats allowed rats to spread across Europe, carrying fleas that spread the Bubonic plague. The ensuing “Black Death” killed perhaps half the population of Europe – another 25 Million people dead due to the ignorance of religion and the uncaring hand of an unproven god.

Out of time now, but more later, assuming I can dodge the lightning bolts on the way home.

To live is Christ to die is gain...(scripture)
that means that when someone dies there is a better life waiting.. if you read near death experiences.. most people dont want to come back.. since neither you or I have ever interviewed any of the dead jews and people who have died in these evil plagues.. how do we know that they want to come back? everything has a cause and effect.. sometimes a child dying by a bullet stops more gang members from killing anyone else..
my mother died and had a NDE.. she said that she did not want to come back.. and that in fact.. there is an afterlife..and it is very real.. and she is far from crazy..

So, we should let Susan Smith and others of her child-murdering ilk off the hook because those murders MIGHT do some good? If such evil leads to good in god's goofy plan, then why stop ANY evil?

"Christian says murdering children leads to greater good" - I can see the headline now.

Horrors!

once again you have used my words the wrong way.. you insult my intelligence by saying that I think someone murdering is good.. what im saying is that good will always rule.. there is a devil as well as a God.. so evil things will happen.. but as the bible says (again you gotta read it to know the story)
"All things work together for the good of those who love the Lord .."

It is clear even though you are very educated, that you have no real understanding of spiritual things. The verse above is talking about Jesus.
The word in this context is Jesus. Below are a couple of verses that clarify.

1Jo 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word,
and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

Rev 19:13 And he [was] clothed with a vesture dipped in blood:
and his name is called The Word of God.

And I have one more verse for you gotbeer:

Gal 6:7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth,
that shall he also reap.

God bless,
happyhat

Wow. I'm glad you're not God because we'd all either be puppets or dead. So...God should have designed us so that we suffered the threat of immediate death whenever we thought of sinning? Or was it just this particular sin that would bring about the cessation of breathing? If not, which particular sins would cause this uncomfortable result and which would not? How about thinking of taking a paper clip from work? Thinkig of committing adultery or having sex outside of marriage? Heck...how about simply looking at a woman or man who is not your married partner with lust? Thinking unkind thoughts about your neighbor? Who gets to choose which thoughts of sin would bring about the penalty and which would not? My point here is that if God programmed us so that we could only do good and were incapable of choosing to not do good or even to think about it for that matter without some immediate dire consequence, that effectively removes our free will. It also would put us in the position of only being able to choose to obey God and choose to follow him, since doing otherwise is rebellion which is sin and would bring about that nasty cessation of breathing result until we changed our minds again. Now who's being ludicrous here? Coercion is fine as long as there are good motives behind it and it prevents something worse? God wants us to love and choose to obey him freely and of our own choice, not because we cannot do otherwise. Love that is coerced is not love and in order to allow us that choice, we must also be allowed to choose the opposite.




Alrighty then....


Yes, Jesus did say this, but you neglected to look up the word "hate" in this passage. It's Miseo which means "to love less than". God's word makes it clear that we are to love Him above all others "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your strength and with all your mind", but this does not mean we do not love our families at al or that God is commanding us here to hate them.



Yup. Jesus said that too, but it should be noted that it was within the context of quoting someone else while telling a parable. A parable, for those that are unfamiliar with the term, is a comparison or a short story that illustrates a moral attitude or religious principle. I'd also like to note that here you use this passage as evidence that God is hateful because He speaks of the ruler in the story punishing those that rebelled, and yet above you suggest that he made a mistake by not programming us to do anything but obey without cessation of breathing. You can't have it both ways.




You have yet to establish that it does. In fact, it seems that our converstion thus far has established that committing sin is not a behavior unique to those who profess a certain faith and thus no causality between sin and having faith has been shown since people sin whether they profess a certain faith or not. People also do foolish things whether they have faith or not. Your example of Catholics killing cats because of a mistaken belief (which you will find nowhere in the Bible, I might add) at the suggestion of another human being who is also not infallible and therefore prone to misconception and error still does not show a direct link between Christianity and evil. Okay....the Pope believed a ridiculous idea and people followed it without question and that indirectly contributed to the spread of bubonic plague. It wasn't faith (as in belief in God) that caused this. It was believing that a human being could be infallible and without error (also contradicted by the Bible). Once again, it seems that you have more of a problem with human fallibility and behavior than you do with God himself.

If that were even REMOTELY true, then EVERYONE would go to Heaven. What sort of uncoerced "free will" do we have if eternal punishment is the answer to some choices? Talk about coersion - that is outright abusive.



Just undo this particular evil - it is not always a "sin", at least according to the OT, where one may slay a disobedient child at will (Deuteronomy 21:18-21 -If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.) - a rule that to my knowledge was NOT repealed in the NT. Make ONE SIMPLE CHANGE that lessens evil, saves children, and hardly hurts our free will at all. Indeed, many xians would love a similar anti-abortion law that saves unborn children at the expense of a much harsher free-will erosion for the unwilling childbearers.

Physical laws already restrict my free will - I can't flap my arms and fly, for example. Likewise, I wouldn't mind a physical law or biological restriction on child-murder. Convicted child-killer Susan Smith loved the free-will to kill her own kids, but I am surprised you like it, too.



Great idea - now evil is abolished, and all get into heaven!! THERE'S a god I could like - one who actually does what he says!! What a concept! A win-win for everyone!

You can continue to exalt the existence and necessity of evil, Lisa, but I'd rather go with the good and honest. Evil is not a thing worth saving - I'm surprised that I have to explain to a Christian that evil is not good. The only downside I can see is that all those folks who love to waste time proselytizing for a non-existent god would have no one to left to proselytize. What a shame.

Now, if free-will is such a great thing, why would god set any rules at all? He could say: "make your own rules, if you like, or none at all", and then sort us out by those of us who do good vs those who do evil - and WE get to decide what is good and evil and put that into civil and criminal law - sort of like we have, since the nonexistent god is so lame at enforcing his own decrees.



The intention is clear from the context of the entire set of gospels - Jesus' treatment of his mother is shabby (numerous references); a follower who asks permission to bury his dead father is called unworthy (Matthew 9:59-62); and Jesus says his mission is to turn family members against each other: Luke 12:51-53 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

Furthermore, Jesus rewards those (men) who abandon their families: Matthew 10:29-30 And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's, but he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.



Thanks for the thought, but no, thanks!

I see. So better to have no choice or free will than to have it and have to suffer the consequences of your free choice? Just because you don't happen to like the consequences of a choice and you know ahead of time what they will be doesn't take away the fact that it was your choice to make in the first place. Coming from somone who stated, "I’d rather roast in hell than surrender my logical mind", it's odd that you would be so quick to surrender your ability to think something contrary to what God wants or your ability to choose what you do and don't want to do or would you exempt yourself from such restrictions? Again...love and obedience cannot be freely given unless you also have the ability to chose the opposite.



For the most part, this is exactly what He has done. He's given us the rules for living and treating others, but leaves us the choice whether we will choose the best way or try to make our own and that is precisely what we have done. When you leave it up to the individual to decide what is good and what is not, evil becomes purely subjective for what constitutes will differ from one culture to another and from even one person to another. Should someone else change their concept of evil because it doesn't agree with yours? Why and how do you resolve it when you can't agree? Goodness...we as humans can't agree on the best form of government or even on the best way to eat, let alone on what is universally right and wrong. All you have to do is watch a few minutes of the evening news to see how well that's worked for us so far.



I see...we can leave all the rest because they offend your sensibilities less and people can do whatever else they wish as long as it's not this particular sin? Theft, adultery, spouse abuse...all fine for the choosing but not that one thing. That doesn't answer the question of where you draw the line in preventing sin and when that begins encroaching on our free will. As an adult who was an abused child, I can tell you that I place the responsibility and the blame for what was done to me squarely on the person who did it. Noone forced them to do what they did to me; it was their choice just as it could have been their choice not to. Even if I could go back and prevent it from happening to me by your proposal to remove their ability to choose those actions, I would be unwilling to do so if it meant that I also would have to give up my ability to choose my own actions, thoughts and feelings. Was it a bad situation? Absolutely. Would I be willing to give up my free will to prevent them having theirs? No way.



There is a difference between appreciating having free will and condoning what others choose to do because they also have that same freedom. Much like the argument of favor of allowing people to own guns; just because some choose to kill others with their guns should we abolish all guns entirely? Because some use their free will to commit evil acts, we should remove that free will entirely?

First you object to my proposal to stop child killing as coersion - THEN, when I point out that the threat of eternal punishment is the ULTIMATE in abusive coersion, suddenly coersion is divinely blessed.

In my proposal, no one is coerced not to kill any more than we are coerced not to be able to flap our wings and fly - it would merely become a physical fact - we can't breathe under water, and we can't breathe when we are planning to kill children. Same free will, with a slightly more effective punishment/deterent for making the BAD choice.

Other sins? Maybe, maybe not - the point is, if I can devise a slightly improved human design, then I have beaten the imaginary designer at his own imagined game. And, I have, easily - I have curtailed child-murder while preserving our free will to sin like raving drunken harlots whenever our free will so chooses. I could still freely love, or not, I just wouldn't be able to kill kids. The two are independent.

Yet, you are so fond of your sins - or even, just your POTENTIAL to sin - that you are willing to embrace potential child murdering in order to keep an odious, evil choice.

If that makes you worthy of your god, then I'm happy for both of you, but I want no part of such obvious evil.



We seem to muddle through, though, despite an utterly silent god whose real-world rule enforcement sucks pretty badly. Punishments, even eternal ones, have no deterent effect unless they are clearly visible. Your god is a vacant god, and the returned mail is stacking up.

Ironically, the evening news is reporting that the murder rate is at a 30-year low.



Hey, if I can keep my logical mind, yet lose the ability to kill children - hell, yes, SIGN ME UP. That is a great trade - I could love god yet still be logical and question the bible. Better that than buy into the child-killing, logic-killing requirements of xianity, any day, any year, any universe.



...and if god exists, wasn't it also god's choice to stand idly by and tolerate what was done to you? If it were me, and I believed in that beasty and met him in the afterlife, I would grab his beard, pull him off his blood-stained throne, and teach him the importance of designing a world where even your free-will child abuse resulted in dire, painful, and immediate countermeasures (for making the BAD choice with his/her free-will).

Wow - I've improved things TWO ways, now - curtailing both child killing and child abuse, while preserving logical thought. This is getting good! MORE! MORE!

Gotbeer..
so you are telling me that right now.. you dont curse, drink, smoke? you have never lied, cheated, stole something?
I know that you have.. which means that you hurt people whether their is a God or not.. you say all these things against God as if you dont commit pure evil everyday.. as if you actually care about a child or a human life.. i would much rather believe that for all the people that i have hurt.. they will one day have a better place.. than to just believe that i hurt people (which is inevitable) and they die..so the child that gets molested till they kill themselves just dies.. no remorse.. no wiping away of all the hurt and pain.. for the child that became an alcoholic by watching their father drink BEER.. then dies of alcoholic poisoning.. there is no happiness.. just cease to exist.. after living a life of hurt that someone else caused.. if that is all you believe.. that is really sad.. coming at you with the Word of God does not help.. because you dont understand at this point..and I can't expect you to from where you are sitting.. everyone has these question that you bring up.. but we are not God and dont know everything.. and to say that you have it all figured out, by saying that "ooh! there couldnt possibly be a God.. with all the killing and such.. and the fact that i dont understand all the killing in the bible.. that proves it right there.. since i dont understand it.. there must not be a God.. "

that is ridiculous...

b-ready, I think it's a little extreme to go from accusing gotbeer of minor human non-mortal sins like cursing and lying (and by the way, I don't understand how you consider drinking a "sin" -- did Jesus turn the water to Perrier or wine?) to "as if you actually care about a child or a human life." I think that gotbeer has clearly demonstrated caring. It's possible for someone who is not Christian to be a good person. While Christianity clearly had a great impact on your life and I'm sure did marvelous things for you, it is not the only way for everyone. And one additional thing: in gotbeer's world, the molested child who suicides would cease to exist. Under Christianity, the molested child who suicides would burn in hell eternally. The hinge upon which your argument apparently rests, that self-inflicted "sin" supposedly "caused" by someone else will be forgiven, is fatally flawed.

drinking in moderation is not a sin.. but being an alcoholic and a glutton is.. I dont think Gotbeer is a bad person at all.. those are the sins that I have and sometimes do commit from time to time..i was saying that all of humanity is evil regardless of whether there is a God or not.. and yes, you are correct.. suicide leads to hell.. which tells me that you believe in the word of God.. should not have used that as an example.. (sometimes we just get to technical, dont we?)
well let me get a little technical with you..the word int he greek that was used in that text (about wine) was a word similar to our modern day FRUIT JUICE.. GRAPE JUICE... it was UNFERMENTED wine..once again.. if you dont study to show yourself approve.. you will miss the mark everytime..