Are we responsible for the sins of our gr.-gr.-grandparents

[viole]

That's the only "Why?" there's no answer to. And you wouldn't expect one if God always was, iow, is timeless.

So, do we agree that is logically possible that something can exist that has no answers to "why does it exists"?

Ciao

- viole

 

[metis]

And you're surprised? They exercise their selective interpretation the same as you do.

How pathetically hypocritical and bigoted of you as you are assuming that you are right and whomever disagrees with you must be wrong.

What does "blameless"? Yet most Christian Bibles render it as "perfect" which is a fair translation or rendering of blameless. I guess this goes back to how many biblical translations can dance on the head of a pin.

"Perfect" is an interpretation because "blameless" is not put into any context. On top of that, it defies many other verses that only posit God as being "perfect".

The reason some (priest or scribe) wrote the Book of Job is because they were tired of answering all the time the questions about why evil is rewarded and the good caused to suffer--which is not what was promised for those who followed the law.

What an arrogant statement the above is. You supposedly know exactly what the author was doing and why? Sorry, but there is simply no discussing anything serious with one who plays the know-it-all card.

^^ignore list^^

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

So, do we agree that is logically possible that something can exist that has no answers to "why does it exists"?

Ciao

- viole

There might be a reason for God's existence, if It exists at all, but we'll have to get to where we know God exists (in the next realm, I'm sure) before we'll know any thing more, like "Why?"--if there is a "Why?". If the universe came to be spontaneously, God may have come to be "then" as well, along with it. In any case, however God came to be, or always was, It likely would determine It's own raison d'etre in It's supernatural (?) realm, as we should be doing in this natural one.

How pathetically hypocritical and bigoted of you as you are assuming that you are right and whomever disagrees with you must be wrong.

Oh yeah, I forgot, screwing with the dictionary is the second to last resort, followed closely by name calling--nay, often in tandem. My bad. And the only evidence I needed that I'm right is the dictionary--which, as I've just indicated, you've apparently dismissed and moved on from.

Something I learned to do a long time ago is admit when I'm wrong. It's something I hate so much doing that it serves to remind me to work even harder not to get myself into that situation again. But the lesson never really took until I swore allegiance to the Truth which further forced me to guide my emotions with my head/reason. Of course for that to happen, one has to admit that some philosophical realms are ruled by objective Truth.

"Perfect" is an interpretation because "blameless" is not put into any context. On top of that, it defies many other verses that only posit God as being "perfect".

Yes, more biblical contradictions. That's THE point.

BTW, his perfection/blamelessness is in context. Satan tests Job by trying to to break that perfection. If Job had already broken one of God's laws, Satan would only need point that out. He would neither then be perfect and blameless. And further, the whole point of Job's suing God, so to speak, is to have God explain why God would punish a guiltless man--which God refuses to answer, which is essentially a statement of nolo contendere.

What an arrogant statement the above is. You supposedly know exactly what the author was doing and why? Sorry, but there is simply no discussing anything serious with one who plays the know-it-all card.

No, it's just a reasonable assumption given the facts of the allegory, and God's lack of response, then and now. The arrogance came from whoever wrote it. Arrogance assumes no higher authority. I certainly don't qualify for that. I hold myself accountable to the highest possible authority, the Truth, which is my God, wherever that leads..

^^ignore list^^

There's no need to be blatant. All you had to do was not to respond anymore.