This is incontrovertible proof that God is evil. God does not live by his own go

*chuckle*
You'd be surprised how many places GIa thinks this needs to be discussed. It's almost like he has an infinite supply of time and disposable Email addresses.

Aww shoot, I thought we were his special project.

Ah well.

Is there an Everything Police?

Is this the sort of thing Anonymous fights against? Dispatching internet weenies who spam across all space and time?

Why do you think so lowly of yourself to think you have no impact on the earth or those who even read what you say?

Obi doesn't strike me has having particularly low self esteem
Having said that, he probably doesn't have much impact on the earth.
But I like what he says (sometimes he gets rambly and needs to have a sit down and a biscuit, but otherwise it's good fun)


You on the other hand, I am quite liable to forget.

What irony when I read this from one who has just wasted his time checking out where I go

I'm not sure you know what irony means, but that's neither here nor there - I don't consider that information a waste.

with as many times as he's presented this argument youd think hed be good at it by now lol

Greatest-I-am wrote: What I think does not matter here.

Agreed.

Christians or others of faith following demonstrably evil Gods does matter.

Then why of all the places on the internet you spam with this drivel is none of them a Christian place? Why bother literally everybody except the ones you feel matter in this discussion?

If people started to honor and adore Hitler, you would likely try to dissuade people from following such an entity,...

No. I would oppose their trying to undermine democracy or laws they propose to harm innocent people or aggression they show towards those, if and when they do. But how they feel about Hitler is their business and I'll leave them to it.

... yet some following an even more evil genocidal one does not seem to phase you.

Hitler actually did things, directly or indirectly to people. The biblical god so far did nothing. I'll oppose people doing evil no matter in who's name they do it, alive, dead, or fictional, but their hearts and minds are their own and they are free to poison those at their own discretion. The only time I will intervene is if it is somebody I personally care little enough for that I'd rather they think as I do than think for themselves. Next time you want to predict how I would think or act, get to know me first.

JamesSand wrote:

*chuckle*
You'd be surprised how many places GIa thinks this needs to be discussed. It's almost like he has an infinite supply of time and disposable Email addresses.

Aww shoot, I thought we were his special project.

Ah well.

Is there an Everything Police?

Is this the sort of thing Anonymous fights against? Dispatching internet weenies who spam across all space and time?

Why do you think so lowly of yourself to think you have no impact on the earth or those who even read what you say?

Obi doesn't strike me has having particularly low self esteem
Having said that, he probably doesn't have much impact on the earth.
But I like what he says (sometimes he gets rambly and needs to have a sit down and a biscuit, but otherwise it's good fun)


You on the other hand, I am quite liable to forget.

What irony when I read this from one who has just wasted his time checking out where I go

I'm not sure you know what irony means, but that's neither here nor there - I don't consider that information a waste.

Good that you think a backhanded criticism and insult to freedom of speech and association is not a waste of time.

Quite the Jedi your are.

Regards
DL

Gisteron wrote: [ The only time I will intervene is if it is somebody I personally care little enough for that I'd rather they think as I do than think for themselves. Next time you want to predict how I would think or act, get to know me first.

So you are a Jedi that will only fight for those you know.

And here I thought that Jedi s were concerned with the whole universe.

Oh well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MNANgFCYpk

And it is not what I would call ideal.

Regards
DL

Good that you think a backhanded criticism and insult to freedom of speech and association is not a waste of time.

Quite the Jedi your are.

I rarely consider criticism, direct or backhanded, to be a waste of time:)


We have not even begun to discuss my views on freedom of speech and association, but even then - no one insulted your freedom of speech or association, your use of it was just brought to light. Don't play the victim, it's unbecoming.



Well you've already talked me out of being a Christian, so I guess it's only fair you persuade me how I've failed as a Jedi.

*sigh*

I read the Bible once, or twice. There are several times where Jesus himself (according to the Bible) says something that could be considered an instruction of emulation.

John 13:12-15
So when He had washed their feet, and taken His garments and reclined at the table again, He said to them, "Do you know what I have done to you? "You call Me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for so I am. "If I then, the Lord and the Teacher, washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet.”

John 13:34
"A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another.”

John 15:9-11
"Just as the Father has loved Me, I have also loved you; abide in My love. "If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love. "These things I have spoken to you so that My joy may be in you, and that your joy may be made full.”

These three times are repeated by other disciples as they tell the story of Jesus and are supposed to be the word of Jesus himself. But they are not instructions of emulation. They are examples of how Jesus wanted his disciples to behave as he was supposedly speaking to them at the time.

The other books of the New Testament are mostly comprised of letters of the Disciples to others and not noted as being the word of God or Jesus.

Most of the Old Testament try’s to teach us not to emulate but to follow the law as we are not capable of understanding the will or nature of God. From the New Testament...

Hebrews 10:24-30 (NIV)
24 And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds, 25 not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.

26 If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, 27 but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. 28 Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 How much more severely do you think someone deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know him who said, “It is mine to avenge; I will repay, “and again, “The Lord will judge his people.”


When you take out the history of the Hebrews from the Bible then the whole thing becomes a teaching guide that was eventually written from the stories compiled from parts of the Torah and the Disciples of Jesus. Part of that teaching is so that mankind understands that being made in God’s image means that we have the ability to choose. There is a law in which mankind is supposed to follow to live in accordance with God’s wishes and salvation of the soul is a choice made by the individual and can only come through love for the creator, the gifts given and the sacrifice that was made for our behalf. Just as a parent allows their children to go and make mistakes, so does the Hebrew God that is mentioned in the Bible.

But, that’s just my understanding of it.

Greatest-I-am wrote:

Gisteron wrote: The only time I will intervene is if it is somebody I personally care little enough for that I'd rather they think as I do than think for themselves. Next time you want to predict how I would think or act, get to know me first.

So you are a Jedi that will only fight for those you know.

Wrong. Lying yet again.

And here I thought that Jedi s were concerned with the whole universe.

Remember what I said about getting to know me first? I don't recall telling you I was a Jedi nor what I thought a Jedi should be. But thanks once again for trying to educate people on things they understand and care far more about than you do.

Good that you think a backhanded criticism and insult to freedom of speech and association is not a waste of time.

That's funny, I could swear I was defending freedom of speech and association despite your accusation that I wouldn't. And then you just ignored my response to your accusation and are now accusing others of thinking the way you think I do. Do you have not a drop of honesty within you at all?

"It's almost like he has an infinite supply of time and disposable" [sic]

What irony when I read this from one who has just wasted his time checking out where I go.

Looking things up and researching is sort of my job. Yours is being wrong on as much of the internet as you can rush to reach.

Wescli Wardest wrote: Part of that teaching is so that mankind understands that being made in God’s image means that we have the ability to choose.

i always took it as something similar - "let us make man in our image" to me was a way of saying beings who can think about the world - who can understand it in ordered, relational pieces, rather than being stuck at only the level of immediate experience or "instinct"

and the "eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good an evil" i personally take to mean "developing the ability to compare and make judgments, especially value judgments"

i think the two ideas are related - "in the image of the gods"/beings capable of thinking about things abstractly and "knowledge of good and evil" meaning "ability to compare, contrast, and determine value"

and that these are what separate us from the rest of the animal kingdom, at least from the view of ancient people

and it sets the stage for the NT/Jesus determination of "love" as the highest social virtue

which its arguable that love could very well BE the highest or "best" virtue for those who can actually pull it off (depending on how we define "best"

i dont know if thats useful to anyone but its as useful as anything else being said here lol so i thought id share

+1 for Jesus!