Clearly your intention is to dismiss under all circumstances anything I might say in response, so I don't see the value in responding point by point. We disagree, and will in all likelihood continue to disagree. My intention was to put these thoughts out there. They obviously aren't meant for...
Possibly to show the initial state of unity, and that the division was not an original ideal state.
But both of those nations are hardly models of Man's or God's ideals, unity notwithstanding. What I have described has not to my knowledge ever been tried on a large scale.
'Evil' in...
Clearly I'm not going by the traditional understanding of biblical Christianity (although, see the first post above). At least, not any mainstream Christianity that I'm familiar with. Also, it was the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil, not the tree of knowledge (or knowledge tree). And...
I'd like to think that was true, but in my experience it's far from generally accepted in the Christian community. In fact, I also posted it on another site and got quite negative responses, implying I'm a heretic. My point is, I suppose, that I'd like to see this become the general...
Here's why the crucifixion was necessary:
Jesus' primary message was the Kingdom of God, in other words God's sovereignty. If God is sovereign, there can be no free will and no such distinction as good and evil. God, after all, created everything and declared it good.
By "eating from"...
What I'm given
to say, I say;
What I'm given
to do, I do;
the credit nor
the blame is mine.
The same applies
to you. Your judgment
is unjust, my friend,
as is my judgment too.
Judgment is itself
unjust when applied
to me and you; for
judgment is the fruit
that ripe falls from
the...
I would suggest trying to avoid religion per se; religions tend to want to tie you down. I can identify with your beliefs, and would suggest just living them. There are those who will try to deceive you into betraying those beliefs but be true to yourself. Finding "fellowship" will both...
Right....any "person", i.e. human being. A human being's will is not absolute, unthwartable. The word 'will' is used of a monarch to suggest power and authority, but being human he/she lacks the actual power to effect his/her will absolutely - thank God!. This is not true of God, though. His...
You're close. In a manner of speaking it is God's desire, provided you understand that God's desire(s) cannot be thwarted or frustrated. God's desire(s) will prevail. This is true of no other being; hence the use of the word 'will' in reference to God. These may seem like unnecessary...
To say that something is a violation of God's will is akin to saying that something is a violation of what God wants. But since we're talking about God, the phrase 'what God wants' is inappropriate for several reasons, and so 'God's will' is used instead. To say that God 'wants' something...
But that's beside the point. Unicorns don't exist,but if I didn't describe it properly you'd recognize it. Sin, whether it exists of not, would have to be the violation of a god's (God's) will, whether he/she/it exists or not. Without a god (God) there can be no sin. Assuming the premise of...
I can't help it if others misunderstand their own doctrine, or avoid the logical conclusions of their own premises. You'll have to ask them about that.
Even if we assume that God doesn't exist for the sake of argument, the word 'sin' still means what it means. Unicorn still means what it means even though most agree they don't exist.
Words have meanings/definitions. These are 'facts'. Not using words properly - according to their meanings - is counter-factual.
But everything is subjective - if you're not God.