satis5d wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:Notice how he says that:
not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law
and
not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished.

satis5d wrote:snip defintion of fufill <snip>

I'm fully aware of what fufill means.
It does not mean; to abandon parts of a law code.

All law is merely the expression of will of an authority.

satis5d wrote:The same authority which gives a law can repeal that law.

satis5d wrote:The law that Jesus speaks about in your Bible quote is God's law which Jesus has been authorized to fulfill (put an end to)..

satis5d wrote: That fulfillment has not yet happened.

satis5d wrote:

Either a law is correct or it isn't.
Law isn't something that stop being valid.
Either it's morally and legally wrong to have a divorce, for example, or it isn't.
Not, one day it is and one day it isn't.
Remember the bible claims morality is an absolute thing, received from god.

Law is only what an authority is willing and able to enforce. Laws change ALL THE TIME

satis5d wrote: and some laws (like some border protection laws at the moment) are unenforced, giving the effect of no law.

satis5d wrote:Your argument here is an open claim to ABSOLUTE TRUTH, which I thought was practically forbidden here.

satis5d wrote:If you can show me where the Bible claims that morality is an absolute thing, I'll be impressed. I've read the whole thing several times and I seem to have missed that part.

“I am the LORD, I do not change” (Malachi 3:6, NKJV).

“All His precepts are sure. They stand fast forever and ever” (Psalm 111:7, 8, NKJV).

Numbers 23:19 ESV
God is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind. Has he said, and will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?

Psalm 33:11 ESV
The counsel of the Lord stands forever, the plans of his heart to all generations.

Deuteronomy 32:4 ESV

“The Rock, his work is perfect, for all his ways are justice. A God of faithfulness and without iniquity, just and upright is he.

satis5d wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:If this god is so loving, and powerful, why does he need to create, much less involve pain and sorrow in his plans?

Pain serves some very valuable purposes.

satis5d wrote:Without pain we would do tremendous damage to our bodies.

satis5d wrote:Sorrow, also has its place.

satis5d wrote:Although we see it as a negative emotion, for some sorrow helps people who otherwise feel somewhat numb to feel anything at all.

satis5d wrote:But overall, as I've said before, I believe that the main reason for pain and suffering in this world is to amplify the benefit of living without either in the New world.

satis5d wrote:

satis5d wrote: which we brought upon ourselves through deception followed by a great rescue and a blessed eternity.

Utter bollocks.
1.Adam and Eve didn't have knowledge of good and evil, untill after they ate the forbidden fruit.
Ergo they cannot rationally be held responsible for doing so.
2. No-one else of the human race was present at that moment or in anyway able to affect the situation. So the idea of original sin is absolute hogwash.

No, Adam did indeed have the knowledge between good and evil. God said that he could eat from every tree of the garden except the one in the middle of it. That's knowledge.

satis5d wrote:What they didn't have before making that fateful decision was the EXPERIENCE of good and evil having only experienced good previous to that moment.

satis5d wrote:You make it sound as though God said, "Hey, there may be a tree in the garden that you cannot eat from. You'll be sorry if you eat from it, though."

satis5d wrote:

satis5d wrote: At some point there has to be a reckoning-- a time where all is put back into balance. If God is going to be the judge, then he must be fair, but as creator, he made this mess. So we have a conundrum.

If god is fair, he wouldn't condemn people that have no moral compass. If god was fair, he wouldn't condemn people for crimes they didn't, heck couldn't have comitted.

I agree with you if all there is is this life on this world.

satis5d wrote:But if He has plans to make all things right by compensating (or even over-compensating them) for the inequality here, there is no concern with fairness.

theropod wrote:...and with the latest set of bullshit rewriting of the Bible II am done here. When an apologist has to lie about his own holy text in order to support his dogma there is no point in discussing anything with him/her. Said apologist can just make up anything he/she chooses and there is no rational means by which one may engage them.

See y'all. Have fun.

RS

Starting with verse 17, this is what Jesus would effectively be saying,

“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to DESTROY THE LAW but I have come to DESTROY THE LAW. Now that I have come to fulfil the law and hence destroy the law, I am telling you that till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall, that is, not the crossing of a “t” or the dotting of an “i” shall in NO wise pass from the law that I am ending. And since fulfilling the law ends and destroys the law, I am telling you that whosoever therefore shall BREAK ONE of these least Commandments shall be referred to as least by those in the kingdom, and since I am abolishing the law, I am telling you that you are now to TEACH THE LAW also that I am abolishing. You have heard before that “THOU SHALL NOT KILL” but now that I am fulfilling and so ending the law, now I say that whosoever is ANGRY with his brother WITHOUT A CAUSE shall be in danger of the judgment and whosoever shall say, YOU FOOL, shall be in danger of HELL FIRE. You have heard that it was said by them of old time, “YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY” but since fulfilling the law ends the law, now I say unto you, That whosoever looks on a woman to lust after her has COMMITTED ADULTERY with her already in his heart.”

satis5d wrote:

trubble76 wrote:So we have to believe in your god first, then we will find reasons to believe in your god, is that right? Do you see what dishonest crap that looks like? You criticise our humility, another example of the dishonest manipulation that you asked me to point out. Does humility mean simply accepting what you say? Many of the people here value science, this makes them far better versed in humility than some proselytising god-botherer who thinks he has a direct line to his god. Humility is saying "I don't know but I'm going to try to find out." not "The answer is god, my god, accept it else." Perhaps you should look to the beam in your eye before casting judgement on us? You talk about "seekers of truth" but that is not you, is it? You have already found your truth and you want us to swallow it, hook, line and sinker, in the name of humility, on nothing more than your sayso.

You have shown us, as so many before you have done, that you are only interested in manipulation and self-aggrandisement. You have been exposed, the Emporer has no clothes on.

1. If you've paid attention to the key points I've made from the beginning of this thread, my point, and the point of my book is that you don't need to believe in my God or any god. Even if you go to your grave denying His existence, the God I know will rescue you from Hell and set you up for eternity in conditions far better than you can imagine on this earth after it has been refurbished. I say this based on years of study of the same Bible that many of you here criticize.

2. Have I criticized anyone's humility? Or did I point out that up to that point I hadn't noticed much of it.

3. I have been forced to change many parts of my worldview over the years in my search for truth. I value scientific study a great deal. What I believe now has been hard fought, for the most part, and I will not easily be moved from my position, as I expect neither will any of you. I continue to share my beliefs with you because I've not heard that anyone else here has the same peace about death and Hell that I have.

4. What do I stand to gain by manipulating anyone here? I'm not trying to convert you. At best I've kicked the anthill. The ants will scurry around wildly for a little bit, but soon they will go back to their daily business with their anthill fully rebuilt. I'm here to learn. I'm learning mostly about how you feel about God, the Bible and religion. I'm also open to tweaking my worldview if and when someone presents something worth adding.

It seems to me that this group is rife with fear and that you soothe each other with talk of how this evil God of the Bible doesn't exist, therefore Hell must not exist. And yet your fear of Hell is not satisfied. (That's my assessment based on two days of observation. I'm not judging anyone in particular or saying that there's anything wrong with what you're doing. In fact, it's great that you have each other for support.) The fact that I'm here and that despite all of your brilliant scientific arguments that God does not exist I am unmoved from my position of loving the God you deny makes some of you uncomfortable. Great! It's good to be uncomfortable sometimes. It exposes the shallowness of our beliefs. I've been there myself lots of times. I gave up a good-paying job at a church because I became so uncomfortable with the fact that I could see that corporate religion was part of the problem, not the solution. I already agree with a lot of things that you guys say, and some of you seem very intelligent.

So here is my big manipulation speech:
Live the way that you see fit and in the end the God that you deny will pleasantly surprise you.

However, if you're unhappy with the way your life is going because of your fear of death and Hell, I know what I've learned and experienced first-hand and I am certain that life can lived without fear of death and Hell because I'm living proof of it. Not because I'm anything special, that's just my experience. It seems to me that offering those who live in fear a solution would be a loving thing to do (provided that I do it for free and for no other personal benefit) since it seems that not many people around here have a solution other than to convince yourselves that God doesn't exist.

William D. Webber wrote:Angel FAQs: The Fall of Satan

... Although Satan appears frequently in the Scriptures, the Bible does not tell us a great deal about the fall of Satan and his angels. "Falling from heaven" does not refer to geography such as going from heaven to hell; Satan still had access to God’s throne in heaven (Job 1:6, 12; 2:1,7). Instead, the term "falling from heaven" is a Near Eastern way of saying that someone has suffered defeat, and it was also used in ancient non-biblical literature to describe the fall of gods from power. It is similar to our expression "falling from grace." Falling from heaven, then, means to lose one’s role or power....

http://www.beliefnet.com/Inspiration/An ... Satan.aspx

KeenIdiot wrote:Isn't the fall of Satan/Lucifer/Devil a sort of expanded universe fiction?
I don't recall it being in the Bible itself.
The Jews certainly had/have a different view on his role in the heavenly judgement.
I also recall the only time Lucifer being mentioned was a purposeful translation against the heretical St. Lucifer. The term should have been translated as the morning star, as my often faulty memory informs me.

Goldenmane wrote:

KeenIdiot wrote:Isn't the fall of Satan/Lucifer/Devil a sort of expanded universe fiction?
I don't recall it being in the Bible itself.
The Jews certainly had/have a different view on his role in the heavenly judgement.
I also recall the only time Lucifer being mentioned was a purposeful translation against the heretical St. Lucifer. The term should have been translated as the morning star, as my often faulty memory informs me.

Comes from Milton's Paradise Lost, IIRC.

Sharon L. Baker wrote:

1. Hell doesn't avenge evil or reveal God's power. It does the exact opposite! By holding on to the doctrine of eternal hell, we in essence hold to the belief that in the end God's will to save all people goes unfulfilled, which puts God's power and goodness in doubt.
2. Hell heralds eternal hopelessness. Suffering in hell for all eternity means that souls burning there forever will exist without any hope of redemption. This leads us to the belief that God withdraws unconditional love once a person's body dies. In other words, God's love for us is tied to the physical body and the temporal realm, and grace disappears for unbelievers after the physical life is gone.
3. Hell keeps evil in eternal existence. The Bible tells us that, in the end, God will abolish evil. Yet, somewhere in the universal expanse of God's perfect peaceful kingdom, evil still survives in those who inhabit hell -- evil "lives" on eternally.
4. Hell creates a clash between justice and love. We unintentionally conjure up a cruel father who demands that unrepentant sinners spend eternity in the flames of hell, finding endless torture an agreeable way to achieve justice -- which is a far cry from the God who loves with an everlasting love. We develop a picture of a God who promotes eternal punishment as positive, as part and parcel of divine love and justice. We try to relieve these tensions by appealing to God's love and mercy on the one hand, and to God's justice and wrath on the other. Such a view of God's love, mercy, justice, and wrath leads to the conclusion that to love is to punish eternally and, therefore, to punish eternally is just.
5. Hell assigns eternal violence to God: Traditional theories of hell not only keep evil in eternal existence; they also keep the cycle of violence in motion for all eternity as unfortunate souls suffer the ferocity of eternal torture because God requires it.
6. Hell executes eternal punishment for temporal sin: Does sin committed during one short, temporary life span deserve an eternity of punishment? Even in our own society, we strive to make the punishment fit the crime.

Sharon L. Baker, The Problem With Hell. Huffington Post, 08/27/10
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sharon-l- ... 92924.html

kennyc wrote:I think he's abandoned ship.....