100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Did God create evil? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Evil is anything that humans don’t like. God gets credit and praise for everything humans like, and he has no responsibility whatsoever for things that humans don’t like. That’s the story. Want a lollipop? 
Do you have an all day sucker? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
God did not create evil.......satan did.......He thought he was better then God....1st mistake.....Then God cast him out for thousands of years........and now my friends he is back with a vengeance and he wants all.......and so every little thing that is evil or wrong is of him......And for the most part man plays right into his hands......And those that no better say to him, "Satan you have no power in my life, I cast you to the pits of hell where you belong." Thats my story and I'm sticking to it. But god created Satan and only cast him out cause Satan was better looking.Kinda petty.. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
voileazur
on
Sun 02/10/08 10:53 AM
|
|
Spidercmb wrote,
My friend, you are missing a very important point. God created all things, all material in the universe. God also created moral spirit beings (angels), who had free will. God then created moral physical beings (humanity), who had free will. With their free will, the moral spirit and physical beings created evil. You guys seem to believe in a false dilemma, that if God didn't create evil, then God couldn't create good. God created all things which are good. God's created moral beings, who had the ability to choose from right and wrong, create evil. Not in the sense in which God can create, ex nihilo, but through their thoughts, actions and inactions. So you see, God gave us the ability to create. When we obey God, we create good. When we obey ourselves, we create evil. I hope you guys understand this now, this conversation has grown stale.
My friend, It is evident YOU are missing the point. Let me sort it out for you. You make several personal faith and belief based statements (product of 'revelation' to you) as though these statements were true. Again, in the domain of faith and beliefs, it would appear that "... YOUR GOD may have created all things...", wich you support for yourself with selective dogma. That appears quite clearly to all be true FOR YOU. And I respect that. It obviously appears to be YOUR FAITH, YOUR BELIEFS, and YOU PERSONNAL TRUTH. But it doesn't make any of it THE TRUTH, regardless of your 'misplaced' and 'ill-worded' insistence. As far as I am concerned, what is true FOR YOU, which I recognize YOU hold to be true for YOURSELF, I assure you CERTAINLY ISN'T TRUE FOR ME, and HAS NO FOUNDATION IN FACT. The stalemate my friend, resides in YOUR insistence to keep presenting faith and beliefs statements as though they we're THE TRUTH, and building on that false premise, further pretending to holding a rational, logical, and fact based exchange. Anyone, ... participating in an open 'debate', which "INQUIRES" whether or not 'god created evil', ... whom comes across with definitive answers, as if it were so FOR ALL, conducts himself in a highly suspect manner, and will cause a 'debating' stalemate: impossible to go on with the debate until the perpetrator of 'confusion' takes reponsibility for the incoherences he introduces into the debate. Here are the major incoherences ... (confusing YOUR faith AND BELIEFS AS THE TRUTH, when in fact, it is nothing other than WHAT IS TRUE FOR YOU!!! , Here is an opportunity for you my friend to re-visit them and and possibly clean-up the incoherences and confusion (stalemate) it all keeps causing in most of the exchanges you choose to participate in. Incoherences = confusion = stalemate: "... 'God created all things', 'all material in the universe'. 'God also created moral spirit beings (angels)', 'who had free will'. 'God then created moral physical beings (humanity)' , 'who had free will'. 'With their free will', 'the moral spirit and physical beings created evil'..." and then, "... 'God (only) created all things which are good' 'God's created moral beings,' 'who had the ability to choose from right and wrong,' 'create evil'..." and then, "... 'God gave us the ability to create.' 'When we obey God, we create good.' 'When we obey ourselves, we create evil.'..." I hope YOU understand, my friend, that all those statements, upon which you build your argument, are all based on the very mystical 'divine revalation', a most PERSONNAL PHENOMENON, which further requires, in your personnal case, an unquestionned belief in a 'litteral' interpretation of the bible. YOU neeed to understand that while some may share YOUR personnal beliefs, many more DO NOT. You cannot engage in a public and open debating forum, insisting that everyone understand and agree with your beliefs with this closing line of yours: "... I hope you guys understand this now...". While I fully understand your incoherences, your insistence doesn't change teh fact that your presmise and argumentation is incoherent, and in the context of this debate, erroneous, therefore false. I suggest you are seriously missing out on that fundamental point my friend. YOU now have the means of cleaning-up the incohenrences you have introduced, and resolve the stalemate you have caused in this debate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey GuideHenry, I am reminded by your avatar of a stately king, who sits at the end of a huge banquet table, with all of his servants working and a jester soon to please... There have been several clear answers from different people, myself included, after the issue at hand became convoluted... The topic as addressed in the OP was did 'God' create evil? If 'God' created all things the question is answered.
OleJeb even quoted scripture, which Christians claim is the word of 'God'... Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace AND CREATE EVIL; I the Lord do all these things.
Again... taken in context, the Isaiah quote must be seen as God certifying to His people that He is indeed the source of all (creator). However, the Bible also makes it clear that God does not create that which is other than good, but it has the potential to be evil or to be used for evil, depending on whether it is a thing or a thinking being. So this passage is plainly saying that that which is (now) evil, was also created God, even though it has become anti-god (evil by god's definition). So, God did not create evil, but rather (by the option of free will) the potential to become evil (anti-god). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I realize you don't want the god you believe in to be associated with the creation of 'evil'. It is your prerogative to believe so. And you wouldn't ever have to provide proof for that beleif. I have no idea why you would come to that conclusion. I'm well aware that when God created man he was well aware that evil would enter the realm of his creation. My point is that he didn't "create it". And if He did - what is it? Wht is it that people want to transfer the fact that God knew about evil to his being responsible for "creating" it? I just find that a "stretch". If this were the way things are, why do we not hold the parents of every criminal responsible for the actions of their siblings? The "proof" for the creation of evil comes in the actions of man. Else we should have evidence outside of man's influence to support this theory that it is God who is the "creator" of it. Where's the evidence of this? And pick whichever God you like - The Christian God, Panthiest God, Allah, Buddah... makes no difference to me which God you pick. Evil exists, even if you think the Christain God doesn't - so where did it come from? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is clearly a difference between a thought, a thing and an action. There is also a difference between inherent genetic predisposition and instict. So, can an ACT, carried out by INSTINCT be evil? If genetics creates an intellectually flawed human, is that man's mistake? Or Gods? If an intellectually flawed human is not capable, say a sociopath, is not capable of "RIGHT" thinking is that "EVIL"? Or is it only the ACTS they committ that are evil? Again, we have the problem of determining where evil exists and HOW it got there? If a "good" creation has flawed evolutionary constructs, how can one deny the lack of forthought on the part of a creator? Hense, the creation was flawed from the beginning. This begs the question, why would a 'perfect' creator, embark on creating anything, which would be harmful to the beloved creations? Obviously such a god 'intended' evil to be a factor in its creation. Since god alone is given the only means of creation, then god, alone, is responsible for all that exists. There is much insight in what you have said here! Again though, if we are talking about the God of the Bible, then we have to understand that long before the creation of humans, evil already existed in God's creation (Satan). And if we are to use the Bible as God's revelation of Himself to mankind, then we see that evil did have a role in God's creation of mankind. He knew from the time He created our reality that we would choose to place ourselves above Him (as happened in Genesis 3). But He created mankind to have a relationship with that was personal and comfortable (as can be inferred from His interaction with Adam in chapters 2&3), so he made a plan that would satisfy His need for justice. The Bible is the story of that plan, which was God taking on himself the responsibility for the rebellion (disobedience) so that individuals (once again)had the opportunity to have a choice other than the one that Adam made for them. (see Paul's apologetic on this in Romans chapter 5.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eljay: Notion is a noun... a noun is a person, place, or a thing, as is an idea... Your claim is llogical, but I will use your logic to show you another side of your example.. Notion = idea = no thing it would follow, then... Conscience = idea = no thing Which did you claim came from 'God' then? C.S.; This is your logic - not mine. I do not play with semantics to satisfy shifting middle logic as you do. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A tree is a noun. A Dog is a noun. Therefore a dog is a tree. See anything wrong with this picture? Your logic is Ionesconic. You should write plays. This is syllogistic. Ionesco was more generally absurd. Yes, but Creative soul's logic is absurd. He merely reminded me of Ionesco - his arguments aren't quite Ionesco's level of absurdity. You can follow Ionesco's thoughts in his examples. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Follow the reasoning you proposed and replace 'evil' with 'good'. God then couldn't have created anything 'good' either; 'NO-THING' 'IS' 'GOOD', anymore than 'NO-THING' 'IS' 'EVIL', according to your logic. This is true. If no thingis evil, then no thing can be good either. Yet, when God created the world he saw that it was good. So evidently God uses words differently than we do.
Abra, You and Voile seem to be qualifying the idea of evil and good with "can be evil/good" or "does evil/good". These idea's are not in question. Actually, the question is a simple one. Jeannie has posted it and asked it rather simplistically so that we can all comprehend it. What does evil look like, and where can we find it? Since God created it we should be able to look all around and see it. So how about a concrete example instead of word games or logic problems with shifting middles as Creative is so want to do. Name something that was created evil. Not with the ability to be evil, or that is subjectively evil so we can get to the answer to the OP before it hits 50 pages. Eljay, Abra and I are not at all suggesting the "can be evil/good" or "does evil/good". You are suggesting such. You seem to be asking others to refrain from 'word games' and 'approximate logic', when it is you Eljay, whom offers arguments based on such. Your lastest request is no different: "... Name something that was created evil. Not with the ability to be evil, or that is subjectively evil..." That Eljay, is playing 'approximate logic' and 'conveniently assembled' word games. The premise you propose is false. Insisting on an answer, which is founded on an erroneous premise, will never make the premise right. To claim that 'god' didn't create 'evil' because 'evil' isn't a thing, would suggest that 'god' didn't create 'good', nor 'love', because neither 'good' nor 'love' are things either, as you insist in your claim. Pointing out the most approximate merit of the premise you propose, by substituting 'evil' with 'good', is an invitation to put an end to the word game, and get back on track. Nothing in creation is neither fundamentally 'evil', nor 'good'. Nothing is either fundamentally 'love' or 'hate', 'generous' or 'greedy'. You could just as easily asked: "... Name something that was created 'GOOD'. Not with the ability to be 'GOOD', or that is subjectively 'GOOD'...". It's a strawman, as apologetics often like to point out. The real object of these types of automatic 'sophisms', is for people, whom share the same belief, to 'defend' their shared dogma, and biblical 'god' from any form of association with the notion of 'evil'. Given that the same group of people insists on promoting that the biblical god has everything to do with the correlate notion of 'good', completely invalidates the 'no evil', disassociation claim. Did god create 'evil'? I don't know! But IF 'god' didn't create 'evil', he sure as 'no hell' didn't create 'good'!!! On the other hand, IF god created 'good', he then sure as 'no hell' created 'evil'!!! If we allow that the Bible is God's revelation to mankind, then it plainly tells us that God IS good, that He Himself is the source of every attribute that is listed as good. Just as plainly, it spells out that sin or evil is that which is against His character or rules. And once again, if we allow that God is the creator (as in the Bible) then that gives Him the authority to set definitions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My friend, It is evident YOU are missing the point. Let me sort it out for you. My friend, you are once again confused. You see, we are discussing beliefs and not truth. I was stating my beliefs and why Christianity makes sense on this issue. I was correcting misunderstandings that you and others have about Christianity. The truth...that's another discussion. But this discussion was about beliefs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I realize you don't want the god you believe in to be associated with the creation of 'evil'. It is your prerogative to believe so. And you wouldn't ever have to provide proof for that beleif. I have no idea why you would come to that conclusion. I'm well aware that when God created man he was well aware that evil would enter the realm of his creation. My point is that he didn't "create it". And if He did - what is it? Wht is it that people want to transfer the fact that God knew about evil to his being responsible for "creating" it? I just find that a "stretch". If this were the way things are, why do we not hold the parents of every criminal responsible for the actions of their siblings? The "proof" for the creation of evil comes in the actions of man. Else we should have evidence outside of man's influence to support this theory that it is God who is the "creator" of it. Where's the evidence of this? And pick whichever God you like - The Christian God, Panthiest God, Allah, Buddah... makes no difference to me which God you pick. Evil exists, even if you think the Christain God doesn't - so where did it come from? Eljay, To keep arguing a faulty and erroneous premise, will not EVER tranform it into an acceptable premise. Human have not in the past, are not currently in the present, nor will they ever inthe future of humanity as we know it 'create' anything in the sense of what we are discussing here. When we use the expression 'human creation', we refer at the very best, to a variation on assembling 'EXISTING' or 'ALREADY CREATED' elements, things, actions, etc. It never, ever refers to humans having actually created anything whatsoever that wasn't a different assembly of the existing created 'stuff'. Again to follow this ... 'human create evil, because the only evidence of evil is in human actions', most approximate and convenient logic, ... would then mean that the only evidence of Love is when humans 'Make Love' or DO acts of 'love', therefore, 'humans' created Love. How about hunger, the only evidence of hunger ..., silly, won't you admit Eljay?!?!? If we keep going down that rabbit hole, we won't need a creator, much less a complicated biblical god. As Valubuilder very accurately pointed out, ... '... If we allow that the Bible is God's revelation to mankind,...' ... and there you have it folks!!! IF one allows ... on pure faith, one might add. For those whom do not allow or believe in that particular Bible, revelation, god, DOGMA, there is simply no amount of 'faulty logic' and word games that will make that chicken fly. It is a matter of faith, pure and simple. You believe and have faith in A PARTICULAR DOGMA, or you don't. That is the principle I shall respect and defend for everyone, as one of our most fundamental democratic right: 'Free Exercise (of religion)Clause' of the First Amendment: Free to believe, and equally FREE to NOT believe, in a particular religious dogma. No facts, logic, or rational explanations need apply!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
voileazur
on
Sun 02/10/08 01:55 PM
|
|
My friend, It is evident YOU are missing the point. Let me sort it out for you. My friend, you are once again confused. You see, we are discussing beliefs and not truth. I was stating my beliefs and why Christianity makes sense on this issue. I was correcting misunderstandings that you and others have about Christianity. The truth...that's another discussion. But this discussion was about beliefs.
Very good my friend, Since all you have been doing is discussing your personnal beliefs, rest assured that I for one am overwhelmingly clear about YOUR BELIEFS, and wouldn't think about debating those in any way shape or form. So please, since that is all you are doing here my friend, would you kindly retract the opening and closing statements of the post I replied to : '... My friend, you are missing a very important point...' I, rest assured am NOT missing your point. I do not share the same view, but I respect your different view totally. NOT MISSNG ANYTHING HERE. So, be good enough to retract that 'BEYOUND-stating-my-beliefs' statement. Given your pure intententions, it is misleading at best. As for your closing statement, '... I hope you guys understand this now,...' Of course '... we guys...' have understood your 'beliefs' ever since reading your first posts. Again, 'we guys' don't agree with your faulty and misleading arguments, which are completely unnecessary in suopporting YOUR beleifs (no need for any support), but we totally understand and agree you should have the beliefs you have!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since all you have been doing is discussing your personnal beliefs, rest assured that I for one am overwhelmingly clear about YOUR BELIEFS, and wouldn't think about debating those in any way shape or form. But you were arguing with me... I'm really confused by you guys sometimes. You dodge and twist and for reasons I can't understand. Didn't you say "It is evident YOU are missing the point. Let me sort it out for you. You make several personal faith and belief based statements (product of 'revelation' to you) as though these statements were true."? We were discussing beliefs, I was simply explaining that to you. I'm am mystified as to why you are still arguing while denying that you are arguing. 1) The discussion was about beliefs. 2) I stated my beliefs. 3) You claim that I was stating my beliefs as an absolute truth. 4) I correct you and explain I am discussing my beliefs. 5) You reply that you haven't questioned my beliefs. WHAT AM I MISSING? One of us is clearly not getting something and from the posts, I would have to say it is you. Any thread about "God" or "Satan" or "Supernatural" is GOING TO BE A DISCUSSION OF BELIEFS. For you to point out that they are my beliefs...seems sort of stupid. Almost as if you aren't following the thread, but you just made a comment trying to get hits on me. This seems to be your MO. Of course '... we guys...' have understood your 'beliefs' ever since reading your first posts. That's why you don't understand my beliefs, because you think that you do. If you think you understand something, then you don't try to learn. Why do you think I'm always having to correct you guys on what Christians believe? You probably assume that I am just twisting (actually, I know you do), but the truth is that you guys only know a twisted caricature of what Christianity is and when your misunderstandings are pointed out to you, you ignore the correction. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's why you don't understand my beliefs, because you think that you do. If you think you understand something, then you don't try to learn. Why do you think I'm always having to correct you guys on what Christians believe? You probably assume that I am just twisting (actually, I know you do), but the truth is that you guys only know a twisted caricature of what Christianity is and when your misunderstandings are pointed out to you, you ignore the correction.
Are you considered an expert on what all Christians believe? From what I have seen there are so many different Christian churches that each believe different things, that if I were to decide to become a Christian I would have no idea which church to sign up with. If all Christians believed the same thing there would only be one church right? Or, if all Christian Churches believe the same way, why are there so many different ones? Why do some of them say that only their Church can baptize etc.? Only their church will get you into heaven. Yes, I have heard some churches speak this way. Its very confusing to say the least. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
feralcatlady
on
Sun 02/10/08 02:34 PM
|
|
NO
It's that simple |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Sun 02/10/08 02:43 PM
|
|
Is there a difference between evil, and socially and culturally determined values of right and wrong? Is there a difference between evil and sin? Be careful, the answers to these questions may indicate if evil is created by God or Man. The catch is this: If 'evil' is man-made, than was the creation of man, without flaw? Would a 'good' creation include an inherently 'evil' capacity? The truth as I see it, (and that makes it an opinion) is that what we define as "evil" is some act that comes from hate, ignorance and fear or some other negative motivation. These acts have to be allowed in order for mankind to have and practice "free will." "Free will" is necessary in order to have freedom. Freedom is paramount. It is of paramount importance that God is Free. Therefore it is of paramount importance that mankind is free, as mankind is an expression of God ~~ made flesh. If we were not allowed to make bad or evil choices, we would not be free. Also, what human entity will be the one to decide and enforce what he or she thinks is bad or evil since it is an opinion. Therefore evil comes about (is manifested) by mankind and it is allowed by that which we call the source of all things or the creator. (God) Edit: Of course I believe that mankind and all that lives and exists IS GOD. And God must be free and must be allowed to manifest both good and evil deeds by and through its being. Jeannie |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
creativesoul
on
Sun 02/10/08 06:34 PM
|
|
A tree is a noun. A Dog is a noun. Therefore a dog is a tree. See anything wrong with this picture?
Yes Eljay, I do see something wrong with this picture. It is your inaccurate representation of what I said, which was this: Notion is a noun... a noun is a person, place, or a thing, as is an idea... Your claim is llogical, but I will use your logic to show you another side of your example..
Notion = idea = no thing it would follow, then... Conscience = idea = no thing Those were my words after the following exchange between us... How can one know what is good without knowing what is good?
To which you wrote this: It's called a "conscience."
So I responded: By your logic, if the world were run by people's conscience, then it would be run by 'God'? Guess what... This world is ran by choices which are made based on one's conscience.
And then you said this which clearly constitutes my conclusion that you claim that 'God' created and somehow controls a conscience, which is a notion (idea) of 'ought' within one's. So then based upon this claim of yours an idea is capable of being created and controlled by 'God... Yes, it is. However, the "conscience" (certainly a topic for another thread) can be seared, and ignored. Once the conscious is seared - it is no longer being "run by God"....
And as soon as you state a "thing" which is evil - we can close down the thread. Until that time, I say God created NOTHING - (that is No-thing for those of you not reading along) that is evil. I claimed that evil is a notion, which it is, as is a conscience... and you said this: A notion is an idea. Try again.
That was your refutation of your previously accepted premise... that a notion was an idea... well guess what Eljay so is a conscience... the idea of having a proper sense of 'ought' Now allow me to point out again your logic as followed by your contribution to the conversation, which I just had to go back through in order to avoid the possibility of anyone believing your misconstruction of my logic... it was yours... not mine... Again then... How much sense does your logic make to you? Notion = idea = no thing (your response to my claim) it would follow, then... Conscience = idea = no thing If a conscience can be created and controlled by 'God' then so can any other notion...Period... Do not play games by misconstruing my words or my intent... Christianity does not stand a chance in a logical discussion... Try again yourself, Eljay...
Then you had the nerve to claim this? Yes, but Creative soul's logic is absurd.
Ah Eljay, I love you no less... my friend |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Too many red frog lollies are evil.... they give you belly aches..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since all you have been doing is discussing your personnal beliefs, rest assured that I for one am overwhelmingly clear about YOUR BELIEFS, and wouldn't think about debating those in any way shape or form. But you were arguing with me... I'm really confused by you guys sometimes. You dodge and twist and for reasons I can't understand. Didn't you say "It is evident YOU are missing the point. Let me sort it out for you. You make several personal faith and belief based statements (product of 'revelation' to you) as though these statements were true."? We were discussing beliefs, I was simply explaining that to you. I'm am mystified as to why you are still arguing while denying that you are arguing. 1) The discussion was about beliefs. 2) I stated my beliefs. 3) You claim that I was stating my beliefs as an absolute truth. 4) I correct you and explain I am discussing my beliefs. 5) You reply that you haven't questioned my beliefs. WHAT AM I MISSING? One of us is clearly not getting something and from the posts, I would have to say it is you. Any thread about "God" or "Satan" or "Supernatural" is GOING TO BE A DISCUSSION OF BELIEFS. For you to point out that they are my beliefs...seems sort of stupid. Almost as if you aren't following the thread, but you just made a comment trying to get hits on me. This seems to be your MO. Of course '... we guys...' have understood your 'beliefs' ever since reading your first posts. That's why you don't understand my beliefs, because you think that you do. If you think you understand something, then you don't try to learn. Why do you think I'm always having to correct you guys on what Christians believe? You probably assume that I am just twisting (actually, I know you do), but the truth is that you guys only know a twisted caricature of what Christianity is and when your misunderstandings are pointed out to you, you ignore the correction. Here you go!!! The more you write, and the more confused and incoherent it gets. Where we are at now, is that ... you don't get the point, about the fact that you don't get the point!!! You go on in all kinds of irrelevant and confusing directions, when 'missng the point'!!! 'I', pointed out to you that this was a 'belief' based discussion. It is rather redundant of you, to write a confused post, to remind me of that which I reminded you of in the first place. See how silly this is getting?!?!? You got all mixed with concepts of 'truth' and 'beliefs', and missed the very simple point of my post. I simply asked that you retract the 'correctional-affirmative' opening and closing statements, which are not compatible in any way shape or form with the 'conditional-affirmative' form, essential in communicating, or stating one's personnal beliefs. Should you have a persisting problems understanding what I am referring to, please read and study the very clear 'conditional-affirmative' form, used by Valubuilder when posting the following opening statement, and similar closing statement in 'STATING HIS BELIEFS': '... If we allow that the Bible is God's revelation to mankind...' Very different from your 'corrective-affirmative' opening statement: '... My friend, you are missing a very important point. God created all things, and ...' (not '... 'if' I don't allow the bible as god's revelation,' as 'Valubuilder' accurately states). and your equally 'corrective-affirmative' closing statement '... I hope you guys understand this now, ...' I clearly trust you when you say '... I simply stated my beliefs...'. And that is why I suggested you eliminate the confusion, and incoherence, by retracting the totally misleading and irrelevant language of your opening and closing statements, given your unquestionably clear intent of 'simply stating your beliefs...'. Again, here is my original invitation to you: '... Since all you have been doing is discussing your personnal beliefs, rest assured that I for one am overwhelmingly clear about YOUR BELIEFS, and wouldn't think about debating those in any way shape or form. So please, since that is all you are doing here my friend, would you kindly retract the opening and closing statements of the post I replied to : ...' That's all my friend. Stick to the words, and trust what people write my friend. It will save you from twisting people's communications, and slipping all over the floor with them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since all you have been doing is discussing your personnal beliefs, rest assured that I for one am overwhelmingly clear about YOUR BELIEFS, and wouldn't think about debating those in any way shape or form. But you were arguing with me... I'm really confused by you guys sometimes. You dodge and twist and for reasons I can't understand. Didn't you say "It is evident YOU are missing the point. Let me sort it out for you. You make several personal faith and belief based statements (product of 'revelation' to you) as though these statements were true."? We were discussing beliefs, I was simply explaining that to you. I'm am mystified as to why you are still arguing while denying that you are arguing. 1) The discussion was about beliefs. 2) I stated my beliefs. 3) You claim that I was stating my beliefs as an absolute truth. 4) I correct you and explain I am discussing my beliefs. 5) You reply that you haven't questioned my beliefs. WHAT AM I MISSING? One of us is clearly not getting something and from the posts, I would have to say it is you. Any thread about "God" or "Satan" or "Supernatural" is GOING TO BE A DISCUSSION OF BELIEFS. For you to point out that they are my beliefs...seems sort of stupid. Almost as if you aren't following the thread, but you just made a comment trying to get hits on me. This seems to be your MO. Of course '... we guys...' have understood your 'beliefs' ever since reading your first posts. That's why you don't understand my beliefs, because you think that you do. If you think you understand something, then you don't try to learn. Why do you think I'm always having to correct you guys on what Christians believe? You probably assume that I am just twisting (actually, I know you do), but the truth is that you guys only know a twisted caricature of what Christianity is and when your misunderstandings are pointed out to you, you ignore the correction. Here you go!!! The more you write, and the more confused and incoherent it gets. Where we are at now, is that ... you don't get the point, about the fact that you don't get the point!!! You go on in all kinds of irrelevant and confusing directions, when 'missng the point'!!! 'I', pointed out to you that this was a 'belief' based discussion. It is rather redundant of you, to write a confused post, to remind me of that which I reminded you of in the first place. See how silly this is getting?!?!? You got all mixed with concepts of 'truth' and 'beliefs', and missed the very simple point of my post. I simply asked that you retract the 'correctional-affirmative' opening and closing statements, which are not compatible in any way shape or form with the 'conditional-affirmative' form, essential in communicating, or stating one's personnal beliefs. Should you have a persisting problems understanding what I am referring to, please read and study the very clear 'conditional-affirmative' form, used by Valubuilder when posting the following opening statement, and similar closing statement in 'STATING HIS BELIEFS': '... If we allow that the Bible is God's revelation to mankind...' Very different from your 'corrective-affirmative' opening statement: '... My friend, you are missing a very important point. God created all things, and ...' (not '... 'if' I don't allow the bible as god's revelation,' as 'Valubuilder' accurately states). and your equally 'corrective-affirmative' closing statement '... I hope you guys understand this now, ...' I clearly trust you when you say '... I simply stated my beliefs...'. And that is why I suggested you eliminate the confusion, and incoherence, by retracting the totally misleading and irrelevant language of your opening and closing statements, given your unquestionably clear intent of 'simply stating your beliefs...'. Again, here is my original invitation to you: '... Since all you have been doing is discussing your personnal beliefs, rest assured that I for one am overwhelmingly clear about YOUR BELIEFS, and wouldn't think about debating those in any way shape or form. So please, since that is all you are doing here my friend, would you kindly retract the opening and closing statements of the post I replied to : ...' That's all my friend. Stick to the words, and trust what people write my friend. It will save you from twisting people's communications, and slipping all over the floor with them. voileazur, I reserve the right to state my beliefs as facts. EVERYONE ELSE DOES THE SAME THING, YOU ONLY GET YOUR PANTIES IN A BUNCH WHEN A CHRISTIAN DOES IT. We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father; through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven, was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became truly human. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father [and the Son], who with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets. We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen. My beliefs require that I state my beliefs as fact. Surely you wouldn't want me to give up my beliefs, would you? I don't begrudge you your beliefs, state them as fact all day long. So why is it that so many non-Christians begrudge us Christians our beliefs? Purality of ideas is a good thing, don't you agree? |
|
|
|
|
