Does God make mistakes

[sojourner]

Born of a human woman and Yahweh? Sounds like a demi-god to me . . . your biology is flawed

It's tough for bilogy to be flawed where a mythic and metaphoric character is concerned.

 

[EtuMalku]

Who I am isn't cogent to the argument. If what you said is true -- that you don't believe God exists -- then your only true response to a thread whose OP is, "Does God make mistakes?" can be "a non-existent God can't make mistakes." If that's what you really think, why would you care enough to respond here? Your responses -- from a theological standpoint -- are fluff insofar as this thread is concerned.

You are right, I need not bother myself with such nonsense . . . but for the sake of altruism I must get involved, the lies and delusion have gone far enough

 

[savagewind]

Who I am isn't cogent to the argument. If what you said is true -- that you don't believe God exists -- then your only true response to a thread whose OP is, "Does God make mistakes?" can be "a non-existent God can't make mistakes." If that's what you really think, why would you care enough to respond here? Your responses -- from a theological standpoint -- are fluff insofar as this thread is concerned.

I would give you the award for the truest post, if I had it to give.

 

[EtuMalku]

It's tough for bilogy to be flawed where a mythic and metaphoric character is concerned.

Now you're admitting that god doesn't exist objectively? Talk about calling the kettle black

 

[sojourner]

We create rules and then when people break them, we say (depending) law breakers are evil. If we created a law that promoted murder, then "according to the law", humans would not be commiting crimes.

We commit evil (if you like) acts. Its only evil because we have laws against it "and" it affects us personally to where they sre not Just Acts but they are Evil.

Point: Evil is a subjective word.

Hilter, for example, commited "bad acts" (evil, harsh, terrible, whatever) but he didnt create it. Why is it bad? According to who? Its bad because we base it on our moral code. The Nazi would think it perfectly acceptable for the "acts" they did.

Evil is such an abstract word. I dont use it because its surreal.

I think you have the cart before the horse. Things are against our moral code because we think they're bad.

 

[EtuMalku]

I think you have the cart before the horse. Things are against our moral code because we think they're bad.

No, she's correct . . . nothing is 'bad' or 'good' these are subjective terms they hold no intrinsic value

 

[sojourner]

You are right, I need not bother myself with such nonsense . . . but for the sake of altruism I must get involved, the lies and delusion have gone far enough

I suspect that, rather than "altruism," it's ego. Otherwise, you wouldn't need to twist things in order to call them "delusion."

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Everything, except of course sin. Colossians 1:16 I shall admit, because you are so cute, that I know that everything was made for Jesus because of that word at Colossians 1:16.

Hm... the phrase "for" is throwing me off. The Bible says: with him, in him, through him.

So he IS life not life made For him.

Unless you can rephrase if Im off the mark.

 

[sojourner]

No, she's correct . . . nothing is 'bad' or 'good' these are subjective terms they hold no intrinsic value

It's precisely the subjectivity that provides the impetus for the moral code to begin with. "We don't like it. It must be bad. Therefore, we're going to create a code to provide a framework for labeling it as 'bad.'"

 

[sojourner]

Now you're admitting that god doesn't exist objectively? Talk about calling the kettle black

I never said God existed. I believe God is Existence, itself -- is Being, itself -- is Life, itself.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I think you have the cart before the horse. Things are against our moral code because we think they're bad.

We think they are bad because they are against our moral code. I dont understand the reverse.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I never said God existed. I believe God is Existence, itself -- is Being, itself -- is Life, itself.

Hm. Didnt know thats how you see god. I try to use the term life since god is a loaded word. Why use god?

 

[sojourner]

We think they are bad because they are against our moral code. I dont understand the reverse.

Something happens that a bunch of us find subjectively distasteful. "We don't like it." So we come up with some framework (a moral code) for calling the Distasteful Thing "Bad," and provide a framework for dealing with it philosophically.

 

[sojourner]

Hm. Didnt know thats how you see god. I try to use the term life since god is a loaded word. Why use god?

Because I find the theological framework useful for my purposes.

 

[EtuMalku]

I suspect that, rather than "altruism," it's ego. Otherwise, you wouldn't need to twist things in order to call them "delusion."

Not at all, first it is not Ego, it would be superego, but it isn't that either . . . it's the Promethæn in me to help mankind know the truth instead of the lies.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Something happens that a bunch of us find subjectively distasteful. "We don't like it." So we come up with some framework (a moral code) for calling the Distasteful Thing "Bad," and provide a framework for dealing with it philosophically.

Ah. I have a different belief. Morality is built in us: our Buddhanature. We do bad things and we know its bad because it conflicts with Who we are. We have to learn we are not our actions. I understand what you are saying. It make sense. It just doesnt line up in my head (I know. Contradiction). Its logical but not how I see reality (not, choose to see)

 

[EtuMalku]

It's precisely the subjectivity that provides the impetus for the moral code to begin with. "We don't like it. It must be bad. Therefore, we're going to create a code to provide a framework for labeling it as 'bad.'"

Not following you . . . moral codes are general and limited to social / governmental / cultural boundaries in order to maintain some kind of safeness for everyone.

 

[savagewind]

Hm... the phrase "for" is throwing me off. The Bible says: with him, in him, through him.

So he IS life not life made For him.

Unless you can rephrase if Im off the mark.

First of all, I do not trust that all the words were translated right as the original words. I shall change for to about. Everything is about Jesus Christ.

http://biblehub.com/greek/1722.htm

about, after, as.

A primary preposition denoting (fixed) position (in place, time or state), and (by implication) instrumentality (medially or constructively), i.e. A relation of rest (intermediate between eis and ek); "in," at, (up-)on, by, etc. -- about, after, against, + almost, X altogether, among, X as, at, before, between, (here-)by (+ all means), for (... Sake of), + give self wholly to, (here-)in(-to, -wardly), X mightily, (because) of, (up-)on, (open-)ly, X outwardly, one, X quickly, X shortly, (speedi-)ly, X that, X there(-in, -on), through(-out), (un-)to(-ward), under, when, where(-with), while, with(-in). Often used in compounds, with substantially the same import; rarely with verbs of motion, and then not to indicate direction, except (elliptically) by a separate (and different) preposition.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Everything is about Jesus Christ.

That makes more sense. Im thinking For as, life is given to Jesus rather than life being about Jesus.

 

[sojourner]

Not at all, first it is not Ego, it would be superego, but it isn't that either . . . it's the Promethæn in me to help mankind know the truth instead of the lies.

One having THE truth is ego. It may be your truth -- it may be part of a greater truth to which all of us have partial and particular access. But to say, "I have THE truth" is ... ego.