Jesus=God?

[Jack]

The only way to guarantee that people wouldn't sin is to deprive them of freedom.

Wrong. The easiest and most practical way would have been never to have created the concept of sin in the first place. Your god keeps making things then deciding they weren't quite right. He's a poor workman. By his own standards what he produces is less than perfect. Hell, it's crap.

He doesn't need all of us. He only wants those who love Him willingly.

Another classic example. If he didn't need all of us, why did he create all of us? Bad projection of expected need? Poor planning? Inferior workmanship? I submit that we have been created, if by a god, then the most inept god of the bunch.

[rez]

Quote by: Isherwood Wrong. The easiest and most practical way would have been never to have created the concept of sin in the first place. Your god keeps making things then deciding they weren't quite right. He's a poor workman. By his own standards what he produces is less than perfect. Hell, it's crap.

s it not fun to see DTHMR be so completely and utterly wrong?

[dthmstr254]

Quote by: Isherwood Wrong. The easiest and most practical way would have been never to have created the concept of sin in the first place. Your god keeps making things then deciding they weren't quite right. He's a poor workman. By his own standards what he produces is less than perfect. Hell, it's crap.

is there a choice in what you eat if there is only one option and you can't choose to go without? of course not. same here. the ONLY way to have free will, was to leave ALL the choices on the platter, which includesw sin. otherwise, you would have to live a robot's existence.

Another classic example. If he didn't need all of us, why did he create all of us? Bad projection of expected need? Poor planning? Inferior workmanship? I submit that we have been created, if by a god, then the most inept god of the bunch.

love? caring? want for someone to be able to speak to? I mean, it must get pretty boring up there listening to the same word over and over and over and over...........
well, you get the point.

[Jimmy the Pro]

Quote by: grandpa Yeah, that's what I've never understood. God should just skip all this life stuff and place us all in heaven right away. Otherwise it is simply a pointless, wasteful exercise to see who will u etheir free will for "sin." That many will use their free will in such a way and disbelive in God is obvious. Grandpa h.

Remember this Grandpa, God truely loved us.

Also, if you will know that God had chosen Earth as His Heaven. Now, when earth fell to sin, God had to create a new Heaven. Now look to this, we are inherently sinful, so what would be the point of putting sinful creatures in Heaven. If heaven is suppossed to be perfect, what is the point of putting not perfect people in there?

Also just because we have free will does not mean we will automatically abuse it. However when we do abuse it, we abuse it to fulfill a role of sinfulness. God loved us through sin and knows that we fail, and it is that love for us that he keeps the free-will in the face of sin.

Plus, look at the alternative, if we didn't have the free will, then we would be robots, and there would be no love. It is for this reason that God has allowed free-will to continue in face of deep sin and why He simply cannot wisk away sinful man into perfect heaven.

[Jack]

So since there's no sin in your heaven, you're willing to become "robots" once you're there? If living eternally without sin is god's wish for us, why didn't he create us that way in the first place? Sin did not have to be invented.

[SoccerfreakAB2]

Quote by: dthmstr254 to answer them in a logical sense.

Well, let's get a move on, dwelling in debates leads to off topic discussions, a favorite maneuver of any theist defending illogical theories, or any other debater in that manner.

Quote by: dthmstr254 well, I doubt that David G Myer's Exploring Psychology would be a Christian source at all. Myers is an expert in psychology, making him a fully acceptable source for this. to cite a biology source, I cite Ricki Lewis's Life chapter 31, which deals with the Nervous System..

Myer's seems to have a good understanding of the brain and its activity. I see no mention of a soul, or a separation of mind and body; instead I see the cooperation of the mind and body functions in both thought and action.

I wasn't able to find the Life book by Ricki Lewis. Perhaps some citings?

Quote by: dthmstr254 specific MEMORIES, not cognition, not emotion, shoot, logical thought tends to cause the supposed machines they are supposed to see the action in the brain say the entire brain is going crazy, plus they can only see the actions of the white matter, which is sending action potentials everywhere like crazy anyways, and at speeds highest in the brain, because of the myelin sheaths speeding up the movement..

I wish you could enter the 6th grade and type like everyone else. Specific memories cause cognition, not action. You don't remember the time you fell on the ice, then fall on the ice. And what "machines" are you talking about? What is "they"? The only actions white matter makes is through communication and distribution of grey matter material and impulse. Myelin is involved, but oh so irrelevant. Do you know what you're talking about?

Quote by: dthmstr254 actually, they were in patients' rooms "down the hall". these rooms are closed when the doctor is giving the diagnosis. the people had no connection to the ones with memories of their problems after revival. the deadness of the person was to the point that the brain had shut down to below 5% activity (approximately ten minutes). they even decided to have a control mechanism and bring in someone from another country to have a conversation down the hall on Marfan's Syndrome (a rare type of heart disease which causes irregular heartbeat, mitral valve prolapse, weakening of the heart muscle, and eventually death. otuward symptoms include having an armspan longer than your height, underweight, and, for some odd reason, big feet and fingers.). of the persons who had participated in the study, 25% of the people recalled the height and armspan of the person mentioned, 34% said that Marfan's syndrome was being spoken of, 10% recalled which room it was in, and 50% said that heart disease was being spoken of (mind, the numbers overlap). someone tell me, how did they come by this information?.

Those are crappy stats for one. Two, once again, no citations. You make things up. Prove this isn't one of those things.

Quote by: dthmstr254 and notice that the psychology books I have, many secular psychology journals, and most psychologists still hold to the traditional definition being SOUL, not MIND. so you are saying that emotions don't exist? the mind is logic. mind games deal with logic. almost every time you see mind referred to, it is dealing with logic..

I haven't seen soul in any psychology books I've read, or the one of yours that I looked at online. Where did I say emotions don't forget. What are you talking about? I'm not debating the "logic" of brain activity! Why am I still responding to this post?

Quote by: dthmstr254 oh, you really screwed up what I said. I said to TAKE IT ON A LARGER SCALE. reread and notice that I was taking it to the larger scale by saying that Jesus is the physical manifestation of God, while God is omnipresent (everywhere). .

I just realized you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. So many different pictures are coming from what you're saying. Instead of the mind of Jesus, now God is everywhere, as what? Oxygen? A "soul" that you have no idea how big it is, what substance it embodies or how far it goes onward? I don't see the effect of a larger scale. How can Jesus be a manifestation of God, if God is the mind of Jesus? And who controls the body parts? The mind (slightly more realistic) or Jesus? Even though Jesus is apparently the body, which would then be moved by God, the mind? And what the hell is the spirit doing in this? Floating around?

Quote by: dthmstr254 and if you ever listened to what I said, you would know that you might have well just thrown my paragraph into a blender to pull what you pulled out..

Yeah well you type like a 5 year old who either doesn't know what he's talking about, or can't explain what he thinks he understands. I think I know: there's nothing to understand. It's a mess of illogicalities.

Quote by: dthmstr254 it fits in well with David G Myers. he has his psychology books in many colleges across the US and Europe. game set and match. this is over unless you can actually pull up some psychological journals from someone who denies that Dr Myers is a credible psychologist.

I've looked into his other books and found the "soul" obsession you're talking about. I think this is because his textbook, exploring psychology, is taught in schools and no school would in their right minds allow the teaching of something nonexistant, like the soul. So he saves the obsession for his observational fiction pieces, such as Care for the Soul.

[Jimmy the Pro]

Quote by: Isherwood Wrong. The easiest and most practical way would have been never to have created the concept of sin in the first place. Your god keeps making things then deciding they weren't quite right. He's a poor workman. By his own standards what he produces is less than perfect. Hell, it's crap. Another classic example. If he didn't need all of us, why did he create all of us? Bad projection of expected need? Poor planning? Inferior workmanship? I submit that we have been created, if by a god, then the most inept god of the bunch.

Isherwood, please remember that when God made to be inherently good and not to sin in the first place, but to never allow them to sin was to restrict their choice and not completely love them.

also, sin was not CREATED by God, rather sin was the result of some things good. He created the concept of free will, and that is what leads to the concept of sin. Sin is not a concept created by itself, rather it is a concept spurred by the abuse of free will.

Now you can say "okay, then let's not create free will," but please remember that those who believe in God believe that He loves us and He did not create us to become robots so to truely love us he has to create free will.

Also, please do not take the diction and word choice Sinner has presented. I myself do not agree with all of it. But think of this:

You do not need to have candy, because really it does not provide very much nutrition for you, yet you still enjoy it and want it simply because you know it is good, even if it can do some harmful things. now tell me, are you inept because you eat candy? :rolleyes:

[Jimmy the Pro]

Quote by: Isherwood So since there's no sin in your heaven, you're willing to become "robots" once you're there? If living eternally without sin is god's wish for us, why didn't he create us that way in the first place? Sin did not have to be invented.

again, sin is not something you invent Ish, it is the result of failing of free choice.

Do you invent starving people in a country, or is it the result of an abuse of food distrabution? :rolleyes:

also you do not become a robot in heaven. Rather you become an idividual with free will who does not wish to use it for sin, so if you have free will and do not use it for sin then you have made the choice and since you still have the choice to sin, you are not a robot.

Ish, God first wished to create a heaven on earth without sin and when sin was introduced we fell out of God's grace, but why neglect what you have created in the first place? Why neglect earth as a place if you created it? Would you rather not try to restore and rebuild what you have created. This is infact what God has done and is trying to do. To lead us away from sin and restore Earth as our eternal heaven. He has been trying to do so with the prophets, Jesus, Old Testament heroes and many others.

Look at it this way:

If you have an enormous bridge that you planned carefully to build and took great lengths to do so, if it had a fault in it, would you make a new bridge that could potentially have the same fault, or would you fix the one you already had?

[Jimmy the Pro]

Quote by: rez s it not fun to see DTHMR be so completely and utterly wrong?

rez, have you never been wrong before?

If you have not then please feel free to make these stupid statements.

But if you have would you please do us the favor of posting something or stopping your completely not topical and worthless comments?

[Sinner]

dthmstr254 and what of people who die of SIDS, or died in the tower nursery? or the kids shot in the Columbine or other school shootings? they had lived their life in sin, three of which were Christians for a year. only one died a martyr's death, having answered the gunman's question of "are you a question?" without hesitation with a yes and getting shot for it. this shows that even children today are of enough sound logic to make a decision. but what of the twelve years before those young girls came to know Christ? would those outweigh the single year of serving the Lord that they had? what of my grandfather, who exhibited that "peace that passeth all understanding" although he had only been saved for ten years of his life, then died of a heartattack? or maybe my pastor emeritus, who devoted his life to serving the Lord for 40 years of his 80 year life so far, and has planted a church in which many have come to know Christ? or maybe we should turn this to the Ethiopian Eunuch, who probably died in the desert shortly after his conversion. or the thief on the cross, who died for his sins on a cross, but was saved BY GRACE when Jesus said "today, thou shalt be with me in paradise". according to your logic, each is like the other, having either not been under the Orthodox church (which includes your martyr's death in the 13 year old girl at Columbine) or not lived long enough to have covered their sins. what of Rahab? the harlot who was engrafted into the Jewish belief? or maybe Ruth, a Moabitess who was also engrafted into the Jewish fold. or maybe the many missionaries who have lost their lives after only a few short days of service before being killed through collateral damage in the borders of Israel and the struggle between Hamas and the leaders of Israel. Revelations CLEARLY STATES that the Jews are still under God's protection, going so far as to prophecy that there will be 150000 Jews who will go witnessing throughout the tribulation. obviously, through your logic, recruiting Jews into the fold is an outright preperation for the tribulation, and anyways, the two witnesses in Revelations are Jews as well. most likely, the bulk of the Orthodox church (who will most likely remain if they have not truly accepted the GIFT that salvation is.) will call them heretics as well. by the way, salvation is like adoption, given freely to a person who looks for it, and not reversible.

I am afraid we going of topic here. Yet, I will answer. I don't know the fate of the people you listed. The Church does not claim to know who were not saved. The Church knows who were saved beyond any dooubt ( Saints). None of the people you listed fall into this category.

Isherwood Wrong. The easiest and most practical way would have been never to have created the concept of sin in the first place. Your god keeps making things then deciding they weren't quite right. He's a poor workman. By his own standards what he produces is less than perfect. Hell, it's crap.

People decide where they want to go. Obviously most are being fooled, yet God warned us about this possibility and created mechanisms to protect us if we choose to use them.

The concept of sin is as much a part of reality as a concept of gravity is. You can argue that if there was no gravity people wouldn't fall down, which is true, however no life would be able to exist without gravity.

Another classic example. If he didn't need all of us, why did he create all of us? Bad projection of expected need? Poor planning? Inferior workmanship? I submit that we have been created, if by a god, then the most inept god of the bunch.

Who would want friends who love out of nessesity?

[Jack]

The concept of sin is as much a part of reality as a concept of gravity is.

Then it should be as constant as gravity, which it is not. Not even the theists on this one forum can agree on what constitutes sin . It's a creation of the society it exists in. It is not universal nor is it testable and verifiable like gravity. It is an attitude, a belief...not a force of nature.

There is no logical, love-based reason why anyone would create a situation like your god has supposedly done.

If he didn't create sin, who did? My opinion, society created the concept of sin. You are living under rules invented by a 2000 year old society. Why hasn't god kept his teachings more up-to-date? Why is our society so bothered by difficulties? Because we're still trying to live according to a code that made great sense when it was first developed 2000 years back, but can't possibly address the issues of the modern world.

[Sinner]

Isherwood Then it should be as constant as gravity, which it is not. Not even the theists on this one forum can agree on what constitutes sin . It's a creation of the society it exists in. It is not universal nor is it testable and verifiable like gravity. It is an attitude, a belief...not a force of nature.

I have to disagree. Certainly sin is not as easly tested as gravity is. However consequences of sinning can be tested and predicted. If one indulges in gluttony he will become obese. Obviously most sins are spiritual and damage soul, so the damage done to the soul is not immideately visiable in this world.

There is no logical, love-based reason why anyone would create a situation like your god has supposedly done.

God wants friends who are like Him, so He created us in His likeness. Yet, He gave as freedom to choose whether we want to imitate Him or not. Because true love can only be voluntary. As an example most people do the will of government, yet very few actualy love it.
Unlike government God doesn't force people. This is why the only reason one would do His will is because of love ( so not to upset beloved).
This is perfectly logical and loving.

If he didn't create sin, who did? My opinion, society created the concept of sin. You are living under rules invented by a 2000 year old society. Why hasn't god kept his teachings more up-to-date? Why is our society so bothered by difficulties? Because we're still trying to live according to a code that made great sense when it was first developed 2000 years back, but can't possibly address the issues of the modern world.

One of the qualities of God is that He is sinless. This is what He wants us to be. Obviously because imperfection we cannot be sinless completly ( which He doesn't expect us) but we should do our best. So sin is inevitable consequence of freedom.

The idea that God must change to suite the needs of society is insane. You can't expect laws of nature to change, can you?

[dthmstr254]

Quote by: Isherwood Then it should be as constant as gravity, which it is not. Not even the theists on this one forum can agree on what constitutes sin . It's a creation of the society it exists in. It is not universal nor is it testable and verifiable like gravity. It is an attitude, a belief...not a force of nature. There is no logical, love-based reason why anyone would create a situation like your god has supposedly done. If he didn't create sin, who did? My opinion, society created the concept of sin. You are living under rules invented by a 2000 year old society. Why hasn't god kept his teachings more up-to-date? Why is our society so bothered by difficulties? Because we're still trying to live according to a code that made great sense when it was first developed 2000 years back, but can't possibly address the issues of the modern world.

what constitutes sin is anything that is against the commandments laid out in the Bible, period. point blank.

[Jimmy the Pro]

Ish please read my post on sins

[Jack]

what constitutes sin is anything that is against the commandments laid out in the Bible, period. point blank.

And since only people like you accept the bible as an authority, your morality only applies you and those of a like mind. The rest of us are not obligated to accept your definition of what constitutes sin.

Ish please read my post on sins

I would, but that would constitute a sin in my religion.

[Jimmy the Pro]

Quote by: Isherwood I would, but that would constitute a sin in my religion.

Ignorant much? :rolleyes:

[Jimmy the Pro]

And technically you do not have a religion but a lack thereof

[Jack]

Got irony? Grasp sarcasm?

[rez]

Quote by: ldmaniac rez, have you never been wrong before?

yep

But if you have would you please do us the favor of posting something or stopping your completely not topical and worthless comments?

I am sorry, I can't help but call out the willfull ignorance that spews from a Christian mouth.

[Jimmy the Pro]

Quote by: rez I am sorry, I can't help but call out the willfull ignorance that spews from a Christian mouth.

Okay, but maybe instead of making a pointless commet, offer criticism as to WHY his statements are wrong.

Otherwise, you look like a ignorant fool yourself who does not have the capacity nor the free will to take on such statements. :rolleyes:

Christian mouthes spill no more ignorance than any other mouths and I can use yours as an example of such so either reply with pointful posts or don't reply at all rez.