Loving goodness of god's grace

[Paladin_]

Just curious. Can you explain these things?

Thanks for the reasonable reply, RodISHI.

Which things do you mean? My list? My explanation is based upon my belief that everything in the Bible springs from the imagination of men -- either originally or as a reiteration of some earlier mythology.

My context is that man created gods in their own image, not the other way around. So, naturally, they attributed to their gods all their own flaws and frailties. As to why they made Yahweh so bloodthirsty and vicious, I could only speculate. I honestly don't know how ANY moral being could even IMAGINE dashing babies heads against rocks -- or worse, celebrate it (as David (presumably) did in Psalms)!

That said, that doesn't nullify my standing challenge to Ding (or anyone else), who asserts that I simply didn't read all these horrific and hideous stories in the "proper context."

 

[ding]

It most certainly is an example of how you do not use the proper context in reading the Bible. You don't read the Bible to gain understanding, you read it to confirm your bias.

Ding, HOW did I not "use the proper context" in understanding the Garden story? We've both quoted verses from that narrative, and NONE of them support your interpretation that Adam and Eve were "rationalizing" their behavior. But, as you say, you read it to confirm your own bias.

And I'm STILL waiting for you to explain the "proper" context to explain away the biblical evils I identified before. Here they are again, to refresh your memory:

- Slavery
- Human sacrifice
- Planetary ecocide (including countless innocent human beings and ignorant animals)
- Genocide of entire cultures (making especially certain not to miss any babies or fetuses in the womb)
- Dashing infants' heads against rocks
- Threatening to starve people to the point where they'll be forced to eat their children
- Dooming billions to an eternity of torment in Hell, simply because they were born into the wrong faith.

Whenever you're ready...

Let me ask you these questions... do you believe that people prefer good over evil? Do you believe that people do evil for evil's sake or the sake of their own good? Do you believe that when they do evil rather than abandoning the concept of good that they rationalize that they didn't do evil?

 

[RodISHI]

Just curious. Can you explain these things?

Thanks for the reasonable reply, RodISHI.

Which things do you mean? My list? My explanation is based upon my belief that everything in the Bible springs from the imagination of men -- either originally or as a reiteration of some earlier mythology.

My context is that man created gods in their own image, not the other way around. So, naturally, they attributed to their gods all their own flaws and frailties. As to why they made Yahweh so bloodthirsty and vicious, I could only speculate. I honestly don't know how ANY moral being could even IMAGINE dashing babies heads against rocks -- or worse, celebrate it (as David (presumably) did in Psalms)!

That said, that doesn't nullify my standing challenge to Ding (or anyone else), who asserts that I simply didn't read all these horrific and hideous stories in the "proper context."

Thank you for the clarification of what you think. I do agree with Ding to a point as I have no doubt you are taking these things such as saying "dashing babies heads against rocks" out of context. That is why I asked. Many people have made the same mistake through the ages. The inability to distinguish between the spirit and flesh does that. People are still doing it today, nothing new. The Ten Commandments would be useless commands for God's people if any of them are 'dashing human babies heads against rocks and celebrating it'. If we are talking about the 'little ones' as the little spiritual things (devils, demons, etc) which we have birthed in our own spirit that may help relieve some anxiety over someone picturing blood, brain and gut matter splattered everywhere.

 

[ding]

Just curious. Can you explain these things?

Thanks for the reasonable reply, RodISHI.

Which things do you mean? My list? My explanation is based upon my belief that everything in the Bible springs from the imagination of men -- either originally or as a reiteration of some earlier mythology.

My context is that man created gods in their own image, not the other way around. So, naturally, they attributed to their gods all their own flaws and frailties. As to why they made Yahweh so bloodthirsty and vicious, I could only speculate. I honestly don't know how ANY moral being could even IMAGINE dashing babies heads against rocks -- or worse, celebrate it (as David (presumably) did in Psalms)!

That said, that doesn't nullify my standing challenge to Ding (or anyone else), who asserts that I simply didn't read all these horrific and hideous stories in the "proper context."

You don't read the Bible in context. I can't even get you to agree with me about something which is benign even though I am certain that if you answer my questions in post #122 honestly, you will prove my point about the allegorical meaning of the garden of eden.

I don't know how any honest man can deny that man knows the difference between good and evil; prefers good over evil; when he violates it rather than abandoning the concept he rationalizes that he didn't violate it. And I am amazed that you can not see this self evident truth in the account of Adam and Eve after I have explained it to you. They hid from God because they knew they had done wrong. When confronted with their behavior instead of acknowledging it they made half assed excuses. The fact that you deny this self evidence can only mean that you lack objectivity when it comes to the Bible. You are not here for the truth. You are here to validate your beliefs.

 

[BreezeWood]

.

You are not here for the truth. You are here to validate your beliefs.

spoken by someone that chooses to worship a political agenda disguised as a religion, the concocted 4th century christian bible that has an uninterrupted history of oppression and persecution against humanity from that time to the present.

 

[onefour1]

I was hoping to read PetriFB's thoughts on the loving goodness of God's grace.

 

[Paladin_]

Let me ask you these questions... do you believe that people prefer good over evil? Do you believe that people do evil for evil's sake or the sake of their own good? Do you believe that when they do evil rather than abandoning the concept of good that they rationalize that they didn't do evil?

All interesting questions, Ding! Yes, as a general rule, I believe people DO prefer good over evil. Unfortunately, "evil" is often easier, and people are also (again, as a general rule) more inclined to do what's easier.

That said, I do think there are those who "do evil for evil's sake," just as there are those who do good for good's sake -- and I believe that the latter FAR outnumber the former. And, of course, there ARE people who "rationalize" whatever evil they do.

However, "rationalization" by Adam and Eve is NOT what the Garden story suggests, no matter how many times you insist it does.

 

[Paladin_]

Thank you for the clarification of what you think. I do agree with Ding to a point as I have no doubt you are taking these things such as saying "dashing babies heads against rocks" out of context. That is why I asked. Many people have made the same mistake through the ages. The inability to distinguish between the spirit and flesh does that. People are still doing it today, nothing new. The Ten Commandments would be useless commands for God's people if any of them are 'dashing human babies heads against rocks and celebrating it'. If we are talking about the 'little ones' as the little spiritual things (devils, demons, etc) which we have birthed in our own spirit that may help relieve some anxiety over someone picturing blood, brain and gut matter splattered everywhere.

RodISHI, with the exception of slavery, the narrative context for each of the atrocities I listed is either an act of war, divine punishment, or both. Of course, I understand why you believe I'm taking these quotes "out of context." After all, what sort of 'moral' being -- human or divine -- could condone or even command such hideous acts?

But that's why I issued my original challenge. There IS NO context in which such horrors could make any moral sense. That's why I often introduce them to discussions like this -- to encourage believers to confront the evil in the Bible that is so often glossed over with platitudes and nonsense about "loving goodness." I want to force them, as moral beings, to confront the huge disparity between their own moral understanding and what lay in their "holy" book -- and, hopefully, their morality will ultimately win out!

 

[Paladin_]

You don't read the Bible in context.

AGAIN, I'm asking you what the proper "context" is. Don't keep telling me I'm not reading the Bible in the proper "context." Stop avoiding the challenge, and tell me what that proper "context" IS!

I can't even get you to agree with me about something which is benign even though I am certain that if you answer my questions in post #122 honestly, you will prove my point about the allegorical meaning of the garden of eden.

I don't know how any honest man can deny that man knows the difference between good and evil; prefers good over evil; when he violates it rather than abandoning the concept he rationalizes that he didn't violate it. And I am amazed that you can not see this self evident truth in the account of Adam and Eve after I have explained it to you. They hid from God because they knew they had done wrong. When confronted with their behavior instead of acknowledging it they made half assed excuses. The fact that you deny this self evidence can only mean that you lack objectivity when it comes to the Bible. You are not here for the truth. You are here to validate your beliefs.

I don't know how any honest man can deny that man knows the difference between good and evil, either. What does that have to do with the Garden of Eden story? Adam and Eve (so the story goes) didn't understand the difference UNTIL they ate from the tree -- you know, the one that bestows understanding of GOOD AND EVIL.

And you're flat out lying about them hiding from Yahweh because they "knew they had done wrong." Here's a refresher:

Genesis 3:9 -- "...And the Lord God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself..."

You can make all the assumptions you wish about Adam and Eve's supposed motivations, but there is NOTHING in the narrative of that story that suggests that they were being duplicitous. Yahweh asked them, and they told him -- EXACTLY as it was outlined in the preceding story.

So, again, I'm asking you -- when are you going to stop with the distractions and provide the "context" for the biblical evils you claim I've been missing?

 

[ding]

Let me ask you these questions... do you believe that people prefer good over evil? Do you believe that people do evil for evil's sake or the sake of their own good? Do you believe that when they do evil rather than abandoning the concept of good that they rationalize that they didn't do evil?

All interesting questions, Ding! Yes, as a general rule, I believe people DO prefer good over evil. Unfortunately, "evil" is often easier, and people are also (again, as a general rule) more inclined to do what's easier.

That said, I do think there are those who "do evil for evil's sake," just as there are those who do good for good's sake -- and I believe that the latter FAR outnumber the former. And, of course, there ARE people who "rationalize" whatever evil they do.

However, "rationalization" by Adam and Eve is NOT what the Garden story suggests, no matter how many times you insist it does.

So basically you are agreeing with me that as a rule people prefer good over evil and when they violate it they don't abandon the concept but rather rationalize that they didn't violate, but you can't see any comparison to Genesis where they hid from God because they knew they had done and did not rationalize their wrong behavior by playing word games like you just did?

 

[ding]

You don't read the Bible in context.

AGAIN, I'm asking you what the proper "context" is. Don't keep telling me I'm not reading the Bible in the proper "context." Stop avoiding the challenge, and tell me what that proper "context" IS!

I can't even get you to agree with me about something which is benign even though I am certain that if you answer my questions in post #122 honestly, you will prove my point about the allegorical meaning of the garden of eden.

I don't know how any honest man can deny that man knows the difference between good and evil; prefers good over evil; when he violates it rather than abandoning the concept he rationalizes that he didn't violate it. And I am amazed that you can not see this self evident truth in the account of Adam and Eve after I have explained it to you. They hid from God because they knew they had done wrong. When confronted with their behavior instead of acknowledging it they made half assed excuses. The fact that you deny this self evidence can only mean that you lack objectivity when it comes to the Bible. You are not here for the truth. You are here to validate your beliefs.

I don't know how any honest man can deny that man knows the difference between good and evil, either. What does that have to do with the Garden of Eden story? Adam and Eve (so the story goes) didn't understand the difference UNTIL they ate from the tree -- you know, the one that bestows understanding of GOOD AND EVIL.

And you're flat out lying about them hiding from Yahweh because they "knew they had done wrong." Here's a refresher:

Genesis 3:9 -- "...And the Lord God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself..."

You can make all the assumptions you wish about Adam and Eve's supposed motivations, but there is NOTHING in the narrative of that story that suggests that they were being duplicitous. Yahweh asked them, and they told him -- EXACTLY as it was outlined in the preceding story.

So, again, I'm asking you -- when are you going to stop with the distractions and provide the "context" for the biblical evils you claim I've been missing?

I have already explained to you how to read the Bible in the proper context. I have even given you an example of how to read the Bible in proper context. You have rejected it all. I have done so with a benign concept too, so why in the world would I expect someone like that to accept my explanation for how to read the Bible in the proper context for the less benign concepts? Is it possible that you aren't really interested in understanding other perspectives and are really here to seek conflict and confirm your own biases?

 

[BreezeWood]

.
Loving goodness of god's grace

-- to encourage believers to confront the evil in the Bible that is so often glossed over with platitudes and nonsense about "loving goodness." I want to force them, as moral beings, to confront the huge disparity between their own moral understanding and what lay in their "holy" book -- and, hopefully, their morality will ultimately win out!

amen ....


RODISHI is an Ostrich.

 

[RodISHI]

.
Loving goodness of god's grace

-- to encourage believers to confront the evil in the Bible that is so often glossed over with platitudes and nonsense about "loving goodness." I want to force them, as moral beings, to confront the huge disparity between their own moral understanding and what lay in their "holy" book -- and, hopefully, their morality will ultimately win out!

amen ....


RODISHI is an Ostrich.

Poor thing it will be okay someone may take you seriously at some point

 

[BreezeWood]

.
Loving goodness of god's grace

-- to encourage believers to confront the evil in the Bible that is so often glossed over with platitudes and nonsense about "loving goodness." I want to force them, as moral beings, to confront the huge disparity between their own moral understanding and what lay in their "holy" book -- and, hopefully, their morality will ultimately win out!

amen ....


RODISHI is an Ostrich.

Poor thing it will be okay someone may take you seriously at some point

.

Poor thing it will be okay someone may take you seriously at some point

two peas in a pod ...

sorry you had to hide when made aware other avenues exist for Admission to the Everlasting than your 4th century Jesus ... and good luck using your book to get there.

 

[RodISHI]

sorry you had to hide when made aware other avenues exist for Admission to the Everlasting than your 4th century Jesus ... and good luck using your book to get there.

It really is a shame that you lack the understanding of what and where heaven is. I could almost feel sorry for you but I have put troll food off the menu.

 

[BreezeWood]

It really is a shame that you lack the understanding of what and where heaven is. I could almost feel sorry for you but I have put troll food off the menu.

you are disingenuous, you asked for a quote from your 4th century religion that is a fabrication that I provided - "No one can come to the Father except through me" - rather than responding you buried your head in the sand, too bad for you christian.

Heaven resides in the Everlasting, and is the residence of it's ruler the Almighty who's welcome mat remains the same today as in Antiquity when first proclaimed. that Admission to Heaven is by invitation only, to think you will begin there is the illusion of an egomaniac.

 

[RodISHI]

It really is a shame that you lack the understanding of what and where heaven is. I could almost feel sorry for you but I have put troll food off the menu.

you are disingenuous, you asked for a quote from your 4th century religion that is a fabrication that I provided - "No one can come to the Father except through me" - rather than responding you buried your head in the sand, too bad for you christian.

Heaven resides in the Everlasting, and is the residence of it's ruler the Almighty who's welcome mat remains the same today as in Antiquity when first proclaimed. that Admission to Heaven is by invitation only, to think you will begin there is the illusion of an egomaniac.

My heavenly door is locked to your gibberish.

 

[ding]

It really is a shame that you lack the understanding of what and where heaven is. I could almost feel sorry for you but I have put troll food off the menu.

you are disingenuous, you asked for a quote from your 4th century religion that is a fabrication that I provided - "No one can come to the Father except through me" - rather than responding you buried your head in the sand, too bad for you christian.

Heaven resides in the Everlasting, and is the residence of it's ruler the Almighty who's welcome mat remains the same today as in Antiquity when first proclaimed. that Admission to Heaven is by invitation only, to think you will begin there is the illusion of an egomaniac.

My heavenly door is locked to your gibberish.

That guy is a one trick ax grinding pony.

 

[BreezeWood]

It really is a shame that you lack the understanding of what and where heaven is. I could almost feel sorry for you but I have put troll food off the menu.

you are disingenuous, you asked for a quote from your 4th century religion that is a fabrication that I provided - "No one can come to the Father except through me" - rather than responding you buried your head in the sand, too bad for you christian.

Heaven resides in the Everlasting, and is the residence of it's ruler the Almighty who's welcome mat remains the same today as in Antiquity when first proclaimed. that Admission to Heaven is by invitation only, to think you will begin there is the illusion of an egomaniac.

My heavenly door is locked to your gibberish.

.

My heavenly door is locked to your gibberish.

I agree it is locked christian as with your book, just don't ask for the keys then run away when the door might be opened.

 

[yiostheoy]

I was hoping to read PetriFB's thoughts on the loving goodness of God's grace.

This thread has been a pretentious abortion since it started.