Oh, absolutely. It is, after all, a book written by men.
It's good to see someone actually admitting that, though - and taking responsibility for the fate of humans, rather than pretending we're all being led by spiritual entities.
Advertisement
by Grave_n_idle » Thu Oct 15, 2015 7:27 pm
by Gim » Thu Oct 15, 2015 7:32 pm
Grave_n_idle wrote:Gim wrote:
Which is what sinful humans caused, not God.
Oh, absolutely. It is, after all, a book written by men.
It's good to see someone actually admitting that, though - and taking responsibility for the fate of humans, rather than pretending we're all being led by spiritual entities.
2 Timothy 3:16-17
"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work."
by Grave_n_idle » Thu Oct 15, 2015 7:36 pm
Gim wrote:God pretty much disregards ultimately sinful people, so yes.
Gim wrote:Yes, technically, it is a book written by men, but2 Timothy 3:16-17
"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work."
by Salus Maior » Thu Oct 15, 2015 7:37 pm
Grave_n_idle wrote:
Oh, absolutely. It is, after all, a book written by men.
It's good to see someone actually admitting that, though - and taking responsibility for the fate of humans, rather than pretending we're all being led by spiritual entities.
by Gim » Thu Oct 15, 2015 7:38 pm
Salus Maior wrote:Grave_n_idle wrote:
Oh, absolutely. It is, after all, a book written by men.
It's good to see someone actually admitting that, though - and taking responsibility for the fate of humans, rather than pretending we're all being led by spiritual entities.
That's actually a pretty widely held opinion among Christians. Mostly because according to the Bible that is the case. Adam and Eve chose to eat the fruit and bring evil into the world, Satan merely gave them a suggestion, and not even all that convincingly. So yeah, humanity is responsible for its own evils.
by Grave_n_idle » Thu Oct 15, 2015 7:39 pm
Salus Maior wrote:Grave_n_idle wrote:
Oh, absolutely. It is, after all, a book written by men.
It's good to see someone actually admitting that, though - and taking responsibility for the fate of humans, rather than pretending we're all being led by spiritual entities.
That's actually a pretty widely held opinion among Christians. Mostly because according to the Bible that is the case. Adam and Eve chose to eat the fruit and bring evil into the world, Satan merely gave them a suggestion, and not even all that convincingly. So yeah, humanity is responsible for its own evils.
by Grave_n_idle » Thu Oct 15, 2015 7:40 pm
Gim wrote:Salus Maior wrote:
That's actually a pretty widely held opinion among Christians. Mostly because according to the Bible that is the case. Adam and Eve chose to eat the fruit and bring evil into the world, Satan merely gave them a suggestion, and not even all that convincingly. So yeah, humanity is responsible for its own evils.
So, do you think Satan did not internally plan to corrupt the human race?
by Gim » Thu Oct 15, 2015 7:42 pm
Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"
by Grave_n_idle » Thu Oct 15, 2015 7:45 pm
Gim wrote:
Genesis 3:1Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"
Having a crafty nature and opposing the words of God about the forbidden fruit is deemed evil.
by Salus Maior » Thu Oct 15, 2015 7:46 pm
Gim wrote:Salus Maior wrote:
That's actually a pretty widely held opinion among Christians. Mostly because according to the Bible that is the case. Adam and Eve chose to eat the fruit and bring evil into the world, Satan merely gave them a suggestion, and not even all that convincingly. So yeah, humanity is responsible for its own evils.
So, do you think Satan did not internally plan to corrupt the human race?
by Gim » Thu Oct 15, 2015 7:48 pm
He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years.
by Grave_n_idle » Thu Oct 15, 2015 7:56 pm
Gim wrote:Grave_n_idle wrote:
Genesis 3 is talking about a serpent. It's also not real.
More to the point, read that story objectively - the serpent told the truth, it was god that lied.
Revelations 20:2He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years.
And God lied? The Serpent told them they would see the good and the evil, yet they did not, once their "eyes were opened" and they were ashamed.
by Rock Lobsters » Thu Oct 15, 2015 7:58 pm
by Salus Maior » Thu Oct 15, 2015 7:59 pm
Rock Lobsters wrote:All this talk of forbidden fruit has gotten me wondering.
What does the forbidden fruit taste like? I hope it was extremely bitter so eve could feel the stupidity of the action she just did.
by Rock Lobsters » Thu Oct 15, 2015 8:00 pm
Salus Maior wrote:Rock Lobsters wrote:All this talk of forbidden fruit has gotten me wondering.
What does the forbidden fruit taste like? I hope it was extremely bitter so eve could feel the stupidity of the action she just did.
Both Adam and Eve ate the fruit. And it probably tasted very metaphorical.
by Gim » Thu Oct 15, 2015 8:02 pm
Grave_n_idle wrote:Revelation, like Genesis, is not supposed to be taken as a history. It's obviously metaphorical.
Moreover, you'll perhaps have noticed - some random dude saying something in the Revelation text is not even crediting Jesus or god with the comment. It's just some commentator.
And yes, god lied. And the serpent called him on it. The serpent said that they would be like god (true), knowing good and evil (true) and that they would not - as god had fraudulently claimed in an attempt to scare them straight - 'certainly die' (true).
by Salus Maior » Thu Oct 15, 2015 8:03 pm
Grave_n_idle wrote:
Revelation, like Genesis, is not supposed to be taken as a history. It's obviously metaphorical.
Moreover, you'll perhaps have noticed - some random dude saying something in the Revelation text is not even crediting Jesus or god with the comment. It's just some commentator.
And yes, god lied. And the serpent called him on it. The serpent said that they would be like god (true), knowing good and evil (true) and that they would not - as god had fraudulently claimed in an attempt to scare them straight - 'certainly die' (true).
by Gim » Thu Oct 15, 2015 8:04 pm
Salus Maior wrote:Grave_n_idle wrote:
Revelation, like Genesis, is not supposed to be taken as a history. It's obviously metaphorical.
Moreover, you'll perhaps have noticed - some random dude saying something in the Revelation text is not even crediting Jesus or god with the comment. It's just some commentator.
And yes, god lied. And the serpent called him on it. The serpent said that they would be like god (true), knowing good and evil (true) and that they would not - as god had fraudulently claimed in an attempt to scare them straight - 'certainly die' (true).
How could Revelation be construed as history? It's prophecy...Which is the opposite of history
Considering that Adam and Eve are most certainly dead by this point God really didn't lie about that. Eating the fruit did not only bring sin into the world, but death itself as well.
by Morr » Thu Oct 15, 2015 9:05 pm
Grave_n_idle wrote:Morr wrote:Christ was the fulfillment of Law. Christ is God's Word made flesh.
And Mohammed updated the Greek scripture, and brought the completion of the Bible.
I mean - surely you believe that, too - that's how this works, right? You just get to come in and claim that you're completing another already-arguably-complete religion?
No?
by Menassa » Thu Oct 15, 2015 9:11 pm
Morr wrote:Grave_n_idle wrote:
And Mohammed updated the Greek scripture, and brought the completion of the Bible.
I mean - surely you believe that, too - that's how this works, right? You just get to come in and claim that you're completing another already-arguably-complete religion?
No?
Mohammed retconed Scripture, a bit different from adding to it.
by Tarsonis Survivors » Thu Oct 15, 2015 9:14 pm
by Morr » Thu Oct 15, 2015 9:14 pm
Menassa wrote:You seem to have smuggled the conclusion into your argument. Where do you see Jesus at all from that verse? Without first believing in Jesus.
Thank you.
1. You can't simply say 'from a Christian perspective, you have to prove these things. If you want to show my why something is true you have to actually show me.
2 & 3. Jeremiah clearly was not talking about the time of Jesus, first off, not 'all of Israel new the Lord.' There were plenty of pagans among the people of Israel.
Secondly, the 'they' is the entire World.
Thirdly, now all of Israel does not know the Lord and if you say 'Israel is the Church' that's a self-fulfilling prophecy with no actual basis in Scripture.
Not even going to attempt to explain it?
by Morr » Thu Oct 15, 2015 9:19 pm
by Gim » Thu Oct 15, 2015 9:23 pm
Morr wrote:Menassa wrote:You claim that Jesus needed to fulfill something, that means without Jesus there was a whole.
The Mormons say the same thing.
As doe the Bahai.
That means without Jesus there wasn't a whole.
The Mormons don't preach a post-Christ covenant, I don't think. I also believe they preach that all Christians were wrong for 1900 years, and that they are the actual Church disappeared during this time. While Christianity says there were heresies among the Jews directly before Christ, they still thought that the Jews were the administrators of God's One religion.
I don't know enough about the Bahai to discuss this point, you'd have to elaborate on their theology here for me to elaborate on my objections.
by Morr » Thu Oct 15, 2015 9:28 pm
Grave_n_idle wrote:Gim wrote:
Revelations 20:2
And God lied? The Serpent told them they would see the good and the evil, yet they did not, once their "eyes were opened" and they were ashamed.
Revelation, like Genesis, is not supposed to be taken as a history. It's obviously metaphorical.
Moreover, you'll perhaps have noticed - some random dude saying something in the Revelation text is not even crediting Jesus or god with the comment. It's just some commentator.
And yes, god lied. And the serpent called him on it. The serpent said that they would be like god (true), knowing good and evil (true) and that they would not - as god had fraudulently claimed in an attempt to scare them straight - 'certainly die' (true).
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Elwher, Gorutimania, Imperializt Russia, San Lumen, Simonia, The Holy Therns, Tungstan, Umeria
Advertisement