Zone1 The Problem of Evil

[Clyde 154]

It was once noted that we are not physical beings seeking a spiritual existence, but spiritual beings seeking physical existence. For this to make any sense, belief has to start with the knowledge humans are body, mind, and spirit.

The Apostle Paul (who may have been the very person he said was caught up to the third heaven) once described this existence as only being able to see as though through a dark glass. I do not know what he meant by 'third heaven', but being a photography student back then, I described it as this life being the negative (that brownish film) of a positive print.

I experienced God's love, which is beyond description, beyond imagining. No one in this life can love anyone else as much as they deserve; no one can love you as much as you deserve. Our love is a pale copy of the reality. My immediate desire was, "I wish I could love like that." And, the knowledge that God loves all--not just me--like that.

Looking for physical evidence of God is like looking for physical evidence of love. Looking for evidence about love starts with the wrong idea about love and will only result in wrong conclusions. Even more so when it comes to God. Looking for physical evidence of God starts with the blunder that there is physical evidence to be found. The error in that premise can only result in an error in the conclusion.

You are quoting the Apostle Paul's application of comparing.......the existing N.T. doctrine as "looking through a mirror darkly.....". No where in the context of this passage is there reference to being called upon to enter some 3rd heaven. When the correct context and subject matter Content are applied its clear that Paul is addressing the fact that at the time of his epistle to the Corinthians......these chapters (12-13) are addressing Spiritual Gifts which substituted for Doctrine coming as inspired truth from heaven......at the time of these epistles the New Testament Church/kingdom of God had no formal doctrine as recorded in the Old Law........all doctrine during the birth and infancy of the church came directly from heaven as inspired through the supernatural gifts given to different members of the church......acquired only by the laying on of an Apostle of Christ's hands (Acts 8:17-19, 2 Tim. 1:6).

Addressing your quote from 1 Cor. 13. "looking through a mirror darkly".........this has nothing to do with some spiritual journey to a 3rd heaven.......the context and content do not support such an opinion. During the time period of the 1st century not all mirrors were made from what was then a precious metal (mercury)..........mirrors were constructed of polished metal which did not give a clear reflection but often distorted the image. Paul is declaring that no one had all the Doctrine that was to come by inspiration from Heaven, some had the gift of supernatural wisdom, some had supernatural faith......as Paul quotes, "to one is given faith, another wisdom, another the gift of healing....etc." -- 1 Cor. 12:8-9.

Paul declares that its like looking at a distorted image in a mirror.........no one person had the complete and total doctrine. The PERFECT LAW of LIBERTY would come shortly in the future ........."when that which is perfect comes........that which is in part will be done away (the supernatural gifts)" -- 1 Cor. 13: 1-13 The PERFECT spoken of in 1 Cor. 13 is the same Koine Greek term used by James........"The Perfect Law of Liberty" (James 1:25).........thus, when the Bible, the Word of God was completed, and everyone had access to ALL TRUTH as promised by Jesus Christ and delivered once for All by the saints of the 1st century (Jude 3)...........these supernatural gifts would cease, the only remaining gifts from God are Faith, Hope and Charity/Love (1 Cor. 13:13)........with Love being the greatest gift of all from Heaven (God gave His only begotten Son through the ultimate gift of Love -- John 3:16........that man may come to the knowledge of the truth and find eternal salvation, God would have all men saved (1 Tim. 2:4) A direct quote by the same author as found in 1 Cor. 12-13 PAUL.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

You could say a million different things.

The problem is these religious people are telling everyone that this stuff is TRUE. It's in the Bible, so it's true.

I had one guy start telling me that it didn't rain heavily in the flood story, it was a light constant rain and all kinds of things.

Transition to Train Wreck

A Noah today would have to carry 57 of each animal to cover all the politically correct genders.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

It was once noted that we are not physical beings seeking a spiritual existence, but spiritual beings seeking physical existence. For this to make any sense, belief has to start with the knowledge humans are body, mind, and spirit.

The Apostle Paul (who may have been the very person he said was caught up to the third heaven) once described this existence as only being able to see as though through a dark glass. I do not know what he meant by 'third heaven', but being a photography student back then, I described it as this life being the negative (that brownish film) of a positive print.

I experienced God's love, which is beyond description, beyond imagining. No one in this life can love anyone else as much as they deserve; no one can love you as much as you deserve. Our love is a pale copy of the reality. My immediate desire was, "I wish I could love like that." And, the knowledge that God loves all--not just me--like that.

Looking for physical evidence of God is like looking for physical evidence of love. Looking for evidence about love starts with the wrong idea about love and will only result in wrong conclusions. Even more so when it comes to God. Looking for physical evidence of God starts with the blunder that there is physical evidence to be found. The error in that premise can only result in an error in the conclusion.

Borrowed From Plato's Fantasy About Ideal Forms

 

[Clyde 154]

Transition to Train Wreck

A Noah today would have to carry 57 of each animal to cover all the politically correct genders.

Who knows......maybe the dinosaurs expressed their chosen pronoun identity as a duck billed platypus? gender benders? Science today (pseudo) can't make up their minds if dinos were warm blooded or cold blooded, when the they decided the dinos chose BIRDS as their pronoun of evolution, the new theory declares that dinos had the capacity to be either warm or cold blooded at the same time. Really, you can't make this Sh.......t up.

But in reality......the science of archeology has proven, there is not one inch of the earth's surface that has not been under water, as demonstrated by the fossil remains of sea life atop the highest peaks on earth. The bible declares that during the time of the great flood, the valleys sank and the mountains rose......better known today as continental drift theory (Ps. 104:8) Some valleys sank more than 7 miles.......some mountains rose to over 29K feet. Its suggested that before the Flood Event......the earth was so flat that you could sit on your front porch and watch your dog run away for over a week.

 

[alang1216]

In a prima facie manner creation is demonstrated by the Physical Fact that nothing can create itself from nothing...........like the BIG BANG. Its called the Law of Causality that has never been broken or proven wrong.

You were not here before the BB so you don't know if there was nothing or if there was something there.

If the universe can't explain its own existence by application of the laws of Physics........then CREATION must be Transcendent or Superior to Nature......its called Super (superior) Natural (to nature). Creation does not require FACTS only TRUTHS. TRUTH can be established by a presentation of Prima Facie evidence beyond the reason to doubt otherwise. In order to refute the supernatural creation model you must present the FACTS of PHYSICS that proves the prima facie to be false. Proceed explain via the laws of physics how the universe created itself from nothing, producing 2 gasses (helium and hydrogen) that formed stars which in turn EVOLVED in biological life over billions of years. ITS YOU that claims to be working with facts of science.........creationists claim to be working with prima facie truth beyond reasoon of doubt based upon REASON and LOGIC.

The universe has been explaining itself since there were men to study it. We now know why it rains and that the earth moves around the sun. You expect others to disprove your creationism because you can't prove it for yourself.

God is eternal and requires no creator........

God tell you that?

Once again.....present the LAW OF EVOLUTION as demonstrated by the application of physics and the scientific Method. Demonstrate how non living matter become alive and changed species.....show us an example of how DNA adds unto a healthy example of life. If a creature is to change its DNA producing warm blooded animals from cold blooded creatures as claimed by the Darwinian Cult...........where did the new information come from? Magic? Pond Scum? When any living creature evolves within species.......it must by logic and reason come from dormant pre-existing links. There is no way in hades to add or (wink, wink) MUTATE information that did not previously exist.....most certainly mutation changes any lineage within species........it corrupts the perfect producing an incomplete example of that life. Deformed limbs, eyes, bones,. An example of such is finding a type of deformed fish and claiming that its a completely new life form.....or deformed human remains and claim these examples of deformation are different examples of evolution.

Now you demand that I prove something that you can't prove yourself. Show me God creating life or a new species. Show me any act of creation and I'll be convinced. In fact, show me anything supernatural and I'll be convinced.

If you can't prove abiogenesis ......then by logic you must believe in creationism. Attempting to claim that horizontal evolution equates to vertical evolution (one species changing into another) is laughable. Next you attempt to claim that "consensus" argument establishes facts of science. If that is true........then the 90 + percent of humanity that believes in God in one form or another must be true.....no? Consensus proves nothing......consensus is a subjective opinion. Those calling themselves men of science in history once taught as a consensus that the sun revolved around the earth which was the center of the universe.........that leech bleeding was a cure to certain medical conditions....etc.,

If you can't prove creationism you must believe in abiogenesis.

My Question is? Why did God allow a rib bone to evolve into a megaphone?

Why don't you ask him or doesn't he talk to you? Do you get everything second hand but that is not good enough for me.

 

[alang1216]

It was once noted that we are not physical beings seeking a spiritual existence, but spiritual beings seeking physical existence. For this to make any sense, belief has to start with the knowledge humans are body, mind, and spirit.

The Apostle Paul (who may have been the very person he said was caught up to the third heaven) once described this existence as only being able to see as though through a dark glass. I do not know what he meant by 'third heaven', but being a photography student back then, I described it as this life being the negative (that brownish film) of a positive print.

I experienced God's love, which is beyond description, beyond imagining. No one in this life can love anyone else as much as they deserve; no one can love you as much as you deserve. Our love is a pale copy of the reality. My immediate desire was, "I wish I could love like that." And, the knowledge that God loves all--not just me--like that.

A very comforting feeling for sure.

Looking for physical evidence of God is like looking for physical evidence of love. Looking for evidence about love starts with the wrong idea about love and will only result in wrong conclusions. Even more so when it comes to God. Looking for physical evidence of God starts with the blunder that there is physical evidence to be found. The error in that premise can only result in an error in the conclusion.

You should talk to my wife. She still gets sad when I forget her birthday.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Transition to Train Wreck

A Noah today would have to carry 57 of each animal to cover all the politically correct genders.

Well that reply adds to the other load of rubbish replies to make a veritable sandwich of poop.

 

[dblack]

However, the atheist has it far worse as they have to explain everything else.

Who says? There's no need to offer alternative explanation in order to reject yours. All we need say is, "Sounds like bullshit to me."

 

[Meriweather]

You are quoting the Apostle Paul's application of comparing.......the existing N.T. doctrine as "looking through a mirror darkly.....". No where in the context of this passage is there reference to being called upon to enter some 3rd heaven.

Sigh. Paul had two different thoughts at different times in his life. When not being able to see clearly, Paul used dark glass, often used for mirrors in his time. I used a photographic negative. Neither can be seen through clearly.

Paul described an experience he called "Third Heaven." As I said, it is not clear what he meant by this, an example of not being able to see/describe something more clearly than "third heaven."

From their you launch into an entirely different discussion than the one I was engaged in with alang1216. If you think you can describe third heaven and/or my experience more clearly, I'd be happy to hear it. At the moment (and at the time of my post) I was not, nor am not focused on spiritual gifts.

 

[Meriweather]

A very comforting feeling for sure.

Comforting? Okay, then. Tell me about it.

 

[Meriweather]

You should talk to my wife. She still gets sad when I forget her birthday.

Shrug. If she wants you to remember her birthday, she should remind you of it a reasonably short time before the date--and also how she would like it to be celebrated. I've never been anything but dismissive of turning any special day into a memory game, one where you both lose.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Well that reply adds to the other load of rubbish replies to make a veritable sandwich of poop.

Noah Was a Binary Bigot!!!

 

[alang1216]

Comforting? Okay, then. Tell me about it.

If I have to explain you to you, I guess I was wrong that you'd find "the knowledge that God loves all" comforting.

 

[Meriweather]

If I have to explain you to you, I guess I was wrong that you'd find "the knowledge that God loves all" comforting.

Ponder it. God loves to an unimaginable degree, and we are to love as God loves. Then think about loving all with the strength that requires. Next contemplate the reality of the degree one is able to return anything close to the magnitude of that love. It's like comparing a thimble of water to an ocean, and then ending the day musing over the amount of water still left in one's personal thimble. No, it's not depressing, as one is after a fantastic goal, a great treasure, and doing what is very much worth doing.

However....It's not at all comforting to reflect on how little all of mankind loves God (and His ways) in return, so I tend to veer away from meditating on that. It's too sad.

 

[alang1216]

Ponder it. God loves to an unimaginable degree, and we are to love as God loves. Then think about loving all with the strength that requires. Next contemplate the reality of the degree one is able to return anything close to the magnitude of that love. It's like comparing a thimble of water to an ocean, and then ending the day musing over the amount of water still left in one's personal thimble. No, it's not depressing, as one is after a fantastic goal, a great treasure, and doing what is very much worth doing.

However....It's not at all comforting to reflect on how little all of mankind loves God (and His ways) in return, so I tend to veer away from meditating on that. It's too sad.

People tell me how God is loving but what I read paints a somewhat different picture. Is this the same loving God the killed every man, women, and child and all the animals of the Earth and spared only Noah? Is this the same loving God that commanded Joshua to kill every living thing in Jericho? Is this the same loving God that killed 70,000 Israelites because David too a census?

 

[Meriweather]

People tell me how God is loving but what I read paints a somewhat different picture. Is this the same loving God the killed every man, women, and child and all the animals of the Earth and spared only Noah? Is this the same loving God that commanded Joshua to kill every living thing in Jericho? Is this the same loving God that killed 70,000 Israelites because David too a census?

Stop reading and begin studying. Back in Biblical times and beyond--and can most easily be seen today in the Muslim religion--people sincerely and deeply believed anything that happened--such as lifting one's little finger--could only be done if God first willed that it could happen on that day at that precise moment.

If people were killed (or died) it was because God willed it to happen, otherwise it would not have happened. Catholics came to identify this as God's permissive will versus God's perfect will. So...God commanded Joshua to kill everyone in Jericho? Try, Joshua killed everyone in Jericho, therefore their conclusion was, God commanded it.

A Biblical lesson that runs through the Old Testament is that God is good, God is loving. When something bad happens, it is due to the fault of mankind. When man does not own up to this, worse things happen (see the story of Adam and Eve). David saw people dying all around him. He didn't look for what God did wrong as we do today. He looked for what he had done wrong. The analogy of this is to jump off a high place and then blame the meanness and anger of gravity for all injuries caused, instead of asking, "What did I do wrong that caused all this injury?"

Keep in mind the Bible was not a daily journal written as events unfolded minute by minute. Bible stories were written after the fact, in story form to present lessons, to a people who then understood God is all good and all loving. Their lesson is not about where God failed, but where mankind failed. Today, there seems to be this overriding desire to blame God. We should remember, as they did in Biblical times, that blaming someone else did not work at all well for Adam and Eve--the first who tried the blame game.

 

[alang1216]

Stop reading and begin studying. Back in Biblical times and beyond--and can most easily be seen today in the Muslim religion--people sincerely and deeply believed anything that happened--such as lifting one's little finger--could only be done if God first willed that it could happen on that day at that precise moment.

If people were killed (or died) it was because God willed it to happen, otherwise it would not have happened. Catholics came to identify this as God's permissive will versus God's perfect will. So...God commanded Joshua to kill everyone in Jericho? Try, Joshua killed everyone in Jericho, therefore their conclusion was, God commanded it.

A Biblical lesson that runs through the Old Testament is that God is good, God is loving. When something bad happens, it is due to the fault of mankind. When man does not own up to this, worse things happen (see the story of Adam and Eve). David saw people dying all around him. He didn't look for what God did wrong as we do today. He looked for what he had done wrong. The analogy of this is to jump off a high place and then blame the meanness and anger of gravity for all injuries caused, instead of asking, "What did I do wrong that caused all this injury?"

Keep in mind the Bible was not a daily journal written as events unfolded minute by minute. Bible stories were written after the fact, in story form to present lessons, to a people who then understood God is all good and all loving. Their lesson is not about where God failed, but where mankind failed. Today, there seems to be this overriding desire to blame God. We should remember, as they did in Biblical times, that blaming someone else did not work at all well for Adam and Eve--the first who tried the blame game.

Like most of the faithful, you start with a vision of a perfect, loving God and interpret history and the Bible through that lens. Without that faith to blind you, the events in the Bible would take on a much more sinister veneer and you might come to realize that "God" is a projection of society. In the ancient world, a God was judged on how powerful his worshipers were, and that meant genocide since that was a staple of life back then and nothing to be ashamed of. Today, our Western culture is more kindler and gentler so we view God as loving.

 

[Meriweather]

Like most of the faithful, you start with a vision of a perfect, loving God and interpret history and the Bible through that lens.

Wrong about telling me how I started. (Bold Mine)

Without that faith to blind you, the events in the Bible would take on a much more sinister veneer and you might come to realize that "God" is a projection of society.

Not what happened, far from it. (Bold Mine)

In the ancient world, a God was judged on how powerful his worshipers were, and that meant genocide since that was a staple of life back then and nothing to be ashamed of.

We mostly agree here. There were brutal societies and nations. Shame (at times) was noted.

Today, our Western culture is more kindler and gentler so we view God as loving.

I am not seeing more kindness nor gentleness. We are brutal today as well, just as there areas and periods of great kindness and gentleness then, too. We're pretty much the same.

The references of you? Far from it being the actual me, so perhaps an imaginary friend in some other imaginary conversation?

 

[alang1216]

I am not seeing more kindness nor gentleness. We are brutal today as well, just as there areas and periods of great kindness and gentleness then, too. We're pretty much the same.

Joshua was considered a hero and a man of God. Hitler did much the same and is considered by many as evil incarnate.

 

[Meriweather]

Joshua was considered a hero and a man of God. Hitler did much the same and is considered by many as evil incarnate.

Remember what was happening in Jericho at the time and the grave difference between Jericho and the Israelites? Even so, the basic cause of all wars is that one has what the other wants. David was worse than Joshua, and we do get hints of this as it was well-known that the reason David was not permitted to build the Temple was that he had too much blood on his hands.

What would be of more interest to me would be the accounts of views of God by non-warriors and the nonentities of the day. As the saying goes, It's the victor who writes most of history.