2. Black Forest cake made with real whipped cream, Kirsch and dark German chocolate.
If you are doing a sin, you are going against the will of God
- Thread starter gerryh
- Start date
I like putting turkey gravey on fresh salad on special occassions.
must be #9
Truly evil I would think.
must be #9
Truly evil I would think.
''If you are doing a sin, you are going against the will of God''
''I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.'' Isaiah 45:7
''Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?'' Amos 3:6
''Out of the mouth of the most High proceedeth not evil and good?'' Lamentations 3:38
According to the Bible, god creates all evil.
''I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.'' Isaiah 45:7
''Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?'' Amos 3:6
''Out of the mouth of the most High proceedeth not evil and good?'' Lamentations 3:38
According to the Bible, god creates all evil.
And I was doing so well until that one! :::drool::: Oh well, I love the whole list & no hell where I'm not going... tra la la la! Turkey gravy on salad hmmm DG? Sounds yummy, I know it's good on coleslaw. Yus!
ccasion7:
Very good question. Yes God comes and tell. God comes in human form in every human generation known as Human incarnation. God is unimaginable and no body can see Him since He is beyond even our imagination. Such GOd comes in Human form in every human generation to preach and uplift the human souls through His wonderful divine knowledge. For this purpose He enters a most deserving devotee of Him existing on the earth when He want to come here. That particular devotee to whom God enters for His mission is known also as 'Son of God'. Thus GOd enters into Son of GOd and speaks to us through the mouth of SOn of God.
Son of GOd has surrendered to God fully hence it is the GOd who speaks through Son of GOd the wonderful divine knowledge. Whoever see such SOn of GOd has seen the original God, whoever listened such Son of God has listened to the original God. God is impartial and comes down in every human generation. God alone knows about Himself and HE alone can preach about Himself.
The Veda says that the Lord alone knows about Himself (Brahma vit Brahmaiva). The Gita says that nobody other than the Lord can know the Lord. Some people misinterpret this Vedic statement as “He who knows Brahman becomes Brahman”. But this interpretation contradicts the Gita because the Gita says that nobody other than the Brahman can know Brahman. The conclusion of this is that the Lord alone can preach about the Lord or Himself. Therefore, from this point of view also the Lord has to come down in human form to preach about Himself. When the Lord preaches, He preaches the concept very clearly. Based on this knowledge, you will naturally conclude that the Preacher is the Lord Himself. This is inevitable with any human incarnation.
If you have any doubt about the preacher being the Lord, you can analyse His knowledge. First you must see whether He is quoting the scriptures as a support while introducing the concepts. Then you must apply the faculty of your analysis and see whether His interpretations are logical. When you are satisfied with His divine knowledge in all angles and if such knowledge indicates Him as the Lord you must accept Him. If you are unable to do this, you are covered by jealousy and egoism. Shankara says that the knowledge to identify Brahman (Brahma Jnana) should be heard only after purifying your mind from egoism and jealousy.
If that's the case and God is even beyond our human imagination, then how the hell does he come and tell us what's a sin, other then some wacko screaming in the streets saying God told him so?
I could do the same thing..... and if I did, then who would you believe to be telling the truth? Picking either person would be a mere guess because you have no additional evidence or information to base your choice on..... and you'd be only relying on what some other human told you.... which is the main problem.
So to remove all the fancy talk, what you're really saying is someone eventually gets a vision or becomes possessed by the Holy Spirit and because of this, what they say is what we should all follow.
Ok..... so if that's the case, what sort of procedure exists to separate the genuine person who really spoke with God and the wing nut on the street who just ate some bad cheese?
Or are we just supposed to believe what either tells us without question?
Because I'm sure David Koresh really talked to God and what happened in the Waco standoff was what God planned?
See that's the problem when you rely on some random human claiming to have spoken to God or claims to be the instrument of God's will...... you eventually get a bunch of suckers who fall for the wrong guy or girl and a bunch of people end up dead.
The real problem is that a bunch of suckers fall for the wrong guy a lot more then they fall for the real thing...... so your explanation to me doesn't sound like a very good answer, let alone not without serious fault.
That's a tad contrive.
So let me guess..... this generation's God Speaker is this guy:
"I'ms gonna burn me somes Q'ran books and start WWIII because God came to me and told me to do this...... eh'Heuyck..... Gorsh."
Nobody other then the Lord can know the Lord?
Ok, so that basically means nobody on the face of this planet knows who the Lord is, and therefore, nobody can be trusted to be telling the truth when they claim they're speaking on behalf of the Lord..... because they wouldn't know the Lord if he smacked them up side the head with a frozen trout..... which contradicts your entire above explanation..... much like many things in religion contradicts one another in order to confuse the follower into thinking something means something else, but doesn't....... but really it does....... but only on Fridays.
Your claims above say that in order to prove someone as being a legit speaking for God is to test their knowledge of scripture (Scripture which was written by.... yup..... other humans, not God himself) and if what they say sounds logical.
So if what they say is logical and they can recite a few quips out of the Bible..... that's proof enough? :-?
I'm a former Roman Catholic and not only can I quip a few quotes from the Bible when I need to, but anybody who can read can look up a few scriptures and memorize them...... So since that can be done, testing one on their knowledge of scripture isn't really much of a test of proof is it?
After all I could just stroll into a church some day, claim I talked to God and change everything around as I see fit, so long as I can spout a few Bible quotes to back up what I say and what I say has some level of logic to it.
And if you feel what I am saying is not logical or if what I say to adhere to this vague and not very logical thus, I'm not truly speaking on behalf of God..... then based on the above, I could claim you're jealous and full of yourself.
That's one sure way to ensure that you're always right..... frig.
Why would someone be jealous if they don't believe some wing nut actually spoke to God? Doesn't something actually have to happen or exist in order to be jealous over it?
And full of themselves? (Egoism)
One would think the person claiming to be the Speaker of God would be the one a little full of themselves.
Sorry Datta, your above explanation is not just contradictory, but explains nothing and just runs around in circles acting like it's some sort of ingenious answer.... which it isn't.
But I suppose that makes me Jealous and full of myself.
I'm certainly not Jealous, but I might be just a little full of myself....... and even if I was full of myself, at least I'm not trying to speak on behalf of God and dictating to everybody else what's a sin and how to live one's life as I see it should be lived.
God is a shape shifter?? OMG they do exist.
"You solids and your federation rules and regulations..... Hurmph!"
*Folds Arms*
Last edited:
If that's the case and God is even beyond our human imagination, then how the hell does he come and tell us what's a sin, other then some wacko screaming in the streets saying God told him so?
I could do the same thing..... and if I did, then who would you believe to be telling the truth? Picking either person would be a mere guess because you have no additional evidence or information to base your choice on..... and you'd be only relying on what some other human told you.... which is the main problem.
So to remove all the fancy talk, what you're really saying is someone eventually gets a vision or becomes possessed by the Holy Spirit and because of this, what they say is what we should all follow.
Ok..... so if that's the case, what sort of procedure exists to separate the genuine person who really spoke with God and the wing nut on the street who just ate some bad cheese?
Or are we just supposed to believe what either tells us without question?
Because I'm sure David Koresh really talked to God and what happened in the Waco standoff was what God planned?
See that's the problem when you rely on some random human claiming to have spoken to God or claims to be the instrument of God's will...... you eventually get a bunch of suckers who fall for the wrong guy or girl and a bunch of people end up dead.
The real problem is that a bunch of suckers fall for the wrong guy a lot more then they fall for the real thing...... so your explanation to me doesn't sound like a very good answer, let alone not without serious fault.
That's a tad contrive.
So let me guess..... this generation's God Speaker is this guy:
"I'ms gonna burn me somes Q'ran books and start WWIII because God came to me and told me to do this...... eh'Heuyck..... Gorsh."
Nobody other then the Lord can know the Lord?
Ok, so that basically means nobody on the face of this planet knows who the Lord is, and therefore, nobody can be trusted to be telling the truth when they claim they're speaking on behalf of the Lord..... because they wouldn't know the Lord if he smacked them up side the head with a frozen trout..... which contradicts your entire above explanation..... much like many things in religion contradicts one another in order to confuse the follower into thinking something means something else, but doesn't....... but really it does....... but only on Fridays.
Your claims above say that in order to prove someone as being a legit speaking for God is to test their knowledge of scripture (Scripture which was written by.... yup..... other humans, not God himself) and if what they say sounds logical.
So if what they say is logical and they can recite a few quips out of the Bible..... that's proof enough? :-?
I'm a former Roman Catholic and not only can I quip a few quotes from the Bible when I need to, but anybody who can read can look up a few scriptures and memorize them...... So since that can be done, testing one on their knowledge of scripture isn't really much of a test of proof is it?
After all I could just stroll into a church some day, claim I talked to God and change everything around as I see fit, so long as I can spout a few Bible quotes to back up what I say and what I say has some level of logic to it.
And if you feel what I am saying is not logical or if what I say to adhere to this vague and not very logical thus, I'm not truly speaking on behalf of God..... then based on the above, I could claim you're jealous and full of yourself.
That's one sure way to ensure that you're always right..... frig.
Why would someone be jealous if they don't believe some wing nut actually spoke to God? Doesn't something actually have to happen or exist in order to be jealous over it?
And full of themselves? (Egoism)
One would think the person claiming to be the Speaker of God would be the one a little full of themselves.
Sorry Datta, your above explanation is not just contradictory, but explains nothing and just runs around in circles acting like it's some sort of ingenious answer.... which it isn't.
But I suppose that makes me Jealous and full of myself.
I'm certainly not Jealous, but I might be just a little full of myself....... and even if I was full of myself, at least I'm not trying to speak on behalf of God and dictating to everybody else what's a sin and how to live one's life as I see it should be lived.
"You solids and your federation rules and regulations..... Hurmph!"
*Folds Arms*
Yes God comes in human form. God is unimaginable. But He comes in human form to give His presence to us. He is identified from His divine knowledge.
There is no other alternative than getting the right direction from the knowledge of the right human incarnation. The right knowledge is very essential without which the correct direction in the spiritual effort is lost. All the doubts about the right knowledge can be efficiently clarified from the right human incarnation only. Unless the doubts are perfectly clarified, the knowledge cannot be implemented by the human being. If the direction is wrong, all the effort goes waste and hence the right knowledge plays very important role in any effort. Since there is no other way than the human incarnation (Nanyahpanthah…Shruti), you have to avoid all the exploitations and stick to the concept.
The clue to identify the right human incarnation becomes very important point. The only clue is to recognize the right knowledge, since the right incarnation alone gives the right knowledge. What is the way to recognize the right knowledge? The inner conscience alone can recognize the right knowledge.
Veda says that God is the infinite right knowledge and that God is the excellent knowledge (Satyam Jnanam…, Prajnanam….). This does not mean that God is the knowledge itself. It only means that the possessor of right and excellent knowledge is God and such knowledge is His correct identification mark since it is His inseparable characteristic. If some body wears a red shirt always, the red shirt becomes his identity mark and you can call him as the red shirt like calling “Oh! Red shirt! Come here”. Gita gives clarification on this point, which says that the possessor of knowledge is God (Jnaanitvaatmaiava……). Since God enters the human being only, such identification is mentioned. The human being is always characterized by the knowledge. Knowledge is one sided characteristic of awareness. It means knowledge is always associated with awareness and awareness need not be associated always with knowledge.
An animal or bird has awareness but no knowledge. Therefore, you should not take awareness as the meaning of the words indicating knowledge in Veda like Jnanam and Prajnanam. This clarification is given in Gita, which says that God enters human body (Manusheem….). Hence, Gita always gives clarifications on Veda. Such correct clarification can be correctly clarified by the human incarnation only since the same God, who said Gita, can alone give the original sense of the text. The Author himself can alone give the correct sense of his own statement. Since, God is one and the same in all the human incarnations, any human incarnation can clarify the text said by any other human incarnation.
It is foolish to think to get rid of the bad qualities completely. By spiritual efforts, you can control these bad qualities (Rajas and Tamas) to certain extent and this is also essential because uncontrolled bad qualities disturb the balance of the society. In such case God will punish them. Control is possible but complete eradication is impossible in the case of these bad qualities. Control is boasted as eradication. Therefore, after achieving the control by the detachment from the worldly bonds, these qualities remaining in the soul should be diverted towards the Lord. The Lord is pleased by the basic love existing in these qualities.
The selfless love is like sweet milk and the bad quality is like a ceramic cup. The selfish love is like salt water and the good quality is like a golden cup. The milk is paid but not the golden cup. The sage Shuka says that if the devotion exists, the nature of the quality is not important at all. This was the answer given by the sage to Parik**** in this context (Jarabuddhyapi…., Kimutadhokshajapriyah…Bhagavatam). Here you must be very careful to understand that the already existing sin is diverted by the Lord and the Lord did not generate the sin. Wealth from waste means extraction of wealth from the existing waste.
It does not mean that to extract wealth, waste must be created! Similarly, you can explain the non-vegetarian food of Jesus. People cannot be controlled to avoid the non-vegetarian food. It is already existing which is uncontrollable. Jesus tried to divert this at least towards the God. He advised that one should thank God for providing such non-vegetarian food instead of taking it directly. He showed the dry fish to God with gratefulness. Veda says that you should offer the flesh of the killed animal to God in the sacrifice (Yajna). This does not mean that Veda is asking you to kill the animal. Anyway you are going to kill the animal to eat it and you cannot be controlled under any circumstances. In such case, Veda says that you should offer the flesh to God and eat it.
Shankara says that the scripture is based on the existing nature of the human being and is not generating the same nature (Jnapakam Natu Karakam). Even if Krishna did not exist, such nature is existing in Kali Yuga. Even if Jesus did not exist, such non-vegetarian habit exists in the world. God comes through a medium having the same common qualities of human beings to be close with them. By such common qualities, the Lord encourages them also to have a straight path to God from their qualities without any change. If such encouragement is not given, the sinners will go deeply in the path of sins only, since the path to God is opposite to the sin (Apichet Sa Duracharah, Apichedasi Papebhyah, Sarva Dharman –Gita).
Sin is nothing else than a morally bad act, an act not in accord with reason informed by the Divine Law.
Andy
If you are sinning ... as in breaking the 10 commandments, chances are you're breaking the law: thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not kill ... that sort of thing. According to Moses, God had only 10 rules for people. Not abiding by those 10 rules would most likely be a disspointment for not only God, but most people.
"If you are doing a sin, you are going against the will of God"
Did you just have an epiphany and feel the need to share?
"If you are doing a sin, you are going against the will of God"
Did you just have an epiphany and feel the need to share?
I know one thing that sure pisses me off about religion, that is anyone who tries to complicate it. Because there is NOBODY in the world who knows more about it than I do- even though they think they do. To me religion and the Golden Rule are the same thing, follow it and you can forget the rest of the jibberish.
The animals of the world have the right approach-- I have a picture of two very
ordinary contented looking horses standing nuzzling together by a fence, with
the following words below---
I think I could turn and live with animals,
They are so placid and self-contained;
I stand and look at them long and long.
They do not sweat and whine about their condition;
They do not lie awake in the dark and weep for their sins;
They do not make me sick discussing their duty to god;
Not one is dissatisfied--
Not one is demented with the mania of owning things;
Not one kneels to another, nor to his kind
That lived thousands of years ago;
Not one is respectable or industrious over the whole earth.
WALT WHITMAN
ordinary contented looking horses standing nuzzling together by a fence, with
the following words below---
I think I could turn and live with animals,
They are so placid and self-contained;
I stand and look at them long and long.
They do not sweat and whine about their condition;
They do not lie awake in the dark and weep for their sins;
They do not make me sick discussing their duty to god;
Not one is dissatisfied--
Not one is demented with the mania of owning things;
Not one kneels to another, nor to his kind
That lived thousands of years ago;
Not one is respectable or industrious over the whole earth.
WALT WHITMAN
Last edited: