Finally. An intelligent answer.
I cry when thinking of how many Canadians have followed our neighbors into foolishness and idiocy.
Most Canadians were a cut above in the past but now ---- boo hoo.
Regards
DL
Can God love or have a moral sense?
- Thread starter French Patriot
- Start date
Finally. An intelligent answer.
I cry when thinking of how many Canadians have followed our neighbors into foolishness and idiocy.
Most Canadians were a cut above in the past but now ---- boo hoo.
Regards
DL
Without the New Testament.. ie.. Christ.. the Old Testament is an incomplete and futile document.. an articulation of a pathology without a remedy.. a history without a destiny.. an allegory without a parable.
Granting the premise that he exists at all--which I don't, I'm convinced he doesn't--I see no reason why he couldn't love or have a moral sense, subject to the proviso that whatever those things mean to him, it's not what they mean to us, it's not even close. There's an interesting double standard in theistic thinking though. Something good happens and we're told that god is good, something bad happens and we're told that god is mysterious in ways it's not given to us mere humans to comprehend. But it's precisely that merely human comprehension that's used to justify belief in his innate goodness in the first place. I don't think theism should be permitted to have that one both ways.
Calling god him is irrational.
Since the Christ predates the Old Testament by thousands of years and must have been known to the authors of the OT I wonder if the purpose of the OT could have been the obscuration of Christ.
Since the Christ predates the Old Testament by thousands of years and must have been known to the authors of the OT I wonder if the purpose of the OT could have been the obscuration of Christ.
Hmm... sounds to me like you'd be interested in some of the Gnostic teachings that had a following in the second and third centry... in particular their concept of the Demiurge.
They believed there were two Gods: 1) A petulant, materialist God, called the Demiurge, who was the one to create the physical world with all its decay and who would hammer you with fire and brimstone if he was in a bad mood, and 2) a high God that was all spirit, and who was revealed to humans for the first time by Christ.
They identified the God of Jews and the Old Testmant as the Demiurge, and the God of the New Testament as the high God revealed by Christ.
By the way, do you know where the word "testament" came from? In the Roman Empire, men did not put their hand over their heart to swear and oath... they grabbed their testacles.
If Jesus be Gawd, then he existed an infinite number of years before his birth. If he hadn't waited an infinite number of years, then there must have been a time before Gawd existed. So, if he had waited an infinte time to be born, he was never born. QED
... instead of being a mass of superstitious nonsense? Now, there's a big improvement.
Every religious sect has their own theologians. Which one to believe?
Is theology restricted to reading what is in the bible or does it cover the history of who, what, where and how it came about in its present form? I think the text is useless without the context.
Is theology restricted to reading what is in the bible or does it cover the history of who, what, where and how it came about in its present form? I think the text is useless without the context.
Seems a bit two-faced to claim both (or all) ends of a phenomenon that no-one has any evidence whatsoever for, yes, but predictably and typically human.
I am thinking that someone (or perhaps a group) waaaay back in the past was arguing whose god was the best with someone else and had the bright idea that one god with omni-powers like omnipotence, omniscience, all-knowing etc. couldn't be beaten, so there was Jahweh's birth; also predictably and typically human. "My dad can beat up your dad, sort of childish tomfoolery".
Much easier and vastly more sensible to consider that if there is a god, we call it the universe(s) and it has absolutely no human characteristics of any sort (IE: love, hate, happiness, etc.). And there is evidence of the universe(s).
Pretty funny and sad at the same time.
lol Aren't we all?Just another armchair theology expert...........:lol:
You have rendered your one claim "no human characteriistics of any sort" null by the term "all-knowing" in the previous sentence. Of course you will probably be fined and warned by the modulators.
Where did the human characteristics come from if not the universe/god?
The same place a frog's character came from... the source of life: Mother Earth.You have rendered your one claim "no human characteriistics of any sort" null by the term "all-knowing" in the previous sentence. Of course you will probably be fined and warned by the modulators.
Where did the human characteristics come from if not the universe/god?
What are you smoking, chewing, shooting, etc. today? If you had been paying attention, I said the universe has no human traits and the bit about the omnipowers was a scenario I think that was the origin of Yahweh. Two entirely different topics and comments.You have rendered your one claim "no human characteriistics of any sort" null by the term "all-knowing" in the previous sentence. Of course you will probably be fined and warned by the modulators.
Humans. Humans built gods in their own images. Or maybe it was that paisley colored zebgiraffphelantypus floating around in your computer room that keeps talking to you in a mix of Klingon, Mandarin, and Andromedan that gave us all human characteristics and forced us to give the gods the same characteristics.