How much does the Christian God really love us?

[Enoughie]

Enoughie,
What you say does hold a bit of logic, but your logic is from a standpoint of NOT knowing the PURPOSE of God.
Does God love His creation??? Well you asked the question about a parent. Most parents will die for their children. Think though, if that parent had the power he would stop the death, both for himself and the child. Parents actually feel more pain over the death of a child than over their own death.
Then reason on what God did for mankind. God sent His ONLYBEGOTTEN SON to earth to give his life for us, Matt 20:28, John 1:18. Theologians have even named the pain that God endured at the death and suffering of His son, Patripassionism, that God suffered just as Jesus did. Could you do that for someone you did not care about. God does care about people, 1Pet 5:6,7, Gal 2:20, Rom 5:5-9.

What you're trying to do here is divorce the N.T. from the O.T., but you can't do that.

Is this the same loving God who exterminated almost all of humanity during the great flood?

How much do you have to love your children to drown them and exterminate them? And all this because they fall short of your expectations?

But wait. The people God exterminated during the flood didn't fall short of his expecations.

You see, God is all knowing, so he knows exactly what to expect. Which means that God exterminated his children while knowing far in advance that this is what they'll amount to.

But you say this is the result of Adam and Eve falling from grace?

It really all goes back to the idea of a perfect God designing an imperfect creation, and having to constantly intervene in his creation to fix it. Any design is just as good as its weakest link, and the weakest link was supposedly created in God's image.

This is the picture of the world that the Bible wants us to believe in. But it is such a contradictory story that there is really no reason to believe it. Yet, belief is exactly what this God demands!

How absurd.
_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

 

[Blackdog22]

Then reason on what God did for mankind. God sent His ONLYBEGOTTEN SON to earth to give his life for us, Matt 20:28, John 1:18.

Come on J, every Atheist knows this story. How exactly does that help us now? My mother and father help me out in reality, not in some fantasized story that I have no idea to be true or not. God is like the Dad who promises he will be back to see you, but never comes, and says that if he doesn't ever show up he will give you chocolates and candy in some very, very distant future. While that sounds nice.... Im just not that gullible toward my dads story.

 

[look3467]

If the biblical account is true (and obviously it isn't), then all God did is "fix" his own faulty design of the world through the crucifixion. Well, why would an all-powerful and all-knowing God be such a lousy designer? I don't see why I should be impressed by this spectacle.>>>Enoughie

own faulty design ?

Lets say you created model of wood resembling a man and you breath life into this model to have become a living flesh model.

So far it is a perfect model without any flaws right?

Well, this perfect model knows nothing, for it has no knowledge infused, thereby having no ability to reason between two opposing issues.

Here then lies the designed flaw, (that's what I call it) which was essential for that living model to become like its creator and that was by giving this model the ability to reason, to think and make its own judgments.

It was no faulty design and no mistake.

The steps I gave you on my other post apply whether you believe in God or not.

Your born, you digest information into knowledge and at some point, you figure out that you are nobody in the scheme of things, or better understood, as an imperfect creature. Hence the second step=fall.

The third step is the judgment, meaning that as your born you will die. Both physical and spiritual.

The fourth step is death itself.

Now tell me you are not going through those four steps and now hinging on the last one as the final step.

What God has done is rescue us from the fourth step on the spiritual end of it.

Without the rescue, the spiritual end would have been the end of it.

To visualize it another way, it would have been as like you would have never existed in the first place. Here and gone and no remembrance of your existence at all.

But God be thanked because now you do have credit for your existence here, and then after this time is over for the rest of all eternity.

If that is not God loving us........then this life is limited to only this life.

Blessings, AJ

Blessings, AJ

 

[Enoughie]

own faulty design ?

Lets say you created model of wood resembling a man and you breath life into this model to have become a living flesh model.

So far it is a perfect model without any flaws right?

Well, this perfect model knows nothing, for it has no knowledge infused, thereby having no ability to reason between two opposing issues.

Can a cat reason between two opposite issues? No. Is the "design" of a cat flawed? No.

Here then lies the designed flaw, (that's what I call it) which was essential for that living model to become like its creator and that was by giving this model the ability to reason, to think and make its own judgments.

It was no faulty design and no mistake.

Can God do evil? Can God lie? No. Then how is giving a creation these abilities make him in any way like God? It doesn't

Then how is giving a creation judgment alone makes that creation "like God"? It doesn't. We are no more like God than a cat is like God. The distance between the infinity of God and the finiteness of a cat is equal to the distance between the infinity of God and the finiteness of a human.

Therefore, if you claim that our design is not flawed, then you must also claim that the design of a cat is flawed. In either way, God's design was flawed.

The steps I gave you on my other post apply whether you believe in God or not.

Your born, you digest information into knowledge and at some point, you figure out that you are nobody in the scheme of things, or better understood, as an imperfect creature. Hence the second step=fall.

The third step is the judgment, meaning that as your born you will die. Both physical and spiritual.

The fourth step is death itself.

Now tell me you are not going through those four steps and now hinging on the last one as the final step.

What God has done is rescue us from the fourth step on the spiritual end of it.

Without the rescue, the spiritual end would have been the end of it.

And what is wrong with that? Your God supposedly rescued us from a situation that doesn't require rescuing.

But the result of this "rescue" is that it greatly devalued life. What is the meaning of anything you do in this life, if what you stand to gain in the next life is infinitely more valuable?

Suddenly you don't care to contribute all you can in this life. You only care to contribute just a bit more than what would tip the balance against you on the "day of judgment."

What sort of a rescue is that?

The beauty of this life is that you have a limited time on this earth, and that is why it is valuable.

But you would only contribute to in this life if you can see how your contribution mattered? That's a very selfish view. How is this moral?

I don't view myself as the end purpose of my life. The reason I don't is not because I believe in some theology or some elusive God

There's no "circle of life," like some falsely think. That is not how evolution works. Life is constantly changing, and if we contribute to it at the material, social, personal, emotional, or conceptual level, we can make the world a better place for us, our family, our community, our nation, the world, and future generations.

We all contribute to the perpetuation of life, and that is the purpose of any living being - human, animal, or plant.

We have a great capacity to make the world a better place, and make life enjoyable for us and others. Every generation benefits from the contributions of previous generations.

As Newton said: "If I have seen further than other men it's because I have stood on the shoulders of giants."

To visualize it another way, it would have been as like you would have never existed in the first place. Here and gone and no remembrance of your existence at all.

That would certainly be the result, if you don't contribute anything to the world, whether you believe in some imaginary afterlife or not. But if you contribute to life, you are building the foundation for your family, your children, and future generations - the foundation to what could be a paradise on earth. Your "credit" would be that foundation.

But from what I gather, you don't actually care about your family, children, or future generation. You only care about getting credit for what you've done, whether it was of any substance in this world or not. I believe that's called vanity.

But God be thanked because now you do have credit for your existence here, and then after this time is over for the rest of all eternity.

If that is not God loving us........then this life is limited to only this life.

That is not God loving us. That is a god pandering to our basest desires. And you call that righteousness? I cannot believe a good God could conceive anything so corrupt.

_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

 

[look3467]

Can a cat reason between two opposite issues? No. Is the "design" of a cat flawed? No.>>>Enoughie

You mean can a cat judge between right and wrong as like we? No! Because a cat has no intellect like as we, therefore can not discern between what is right or what is wrong.

Only an intelligent being, such as a god can. Quoting a verse spoken by the serpent to illustrate this view: Gen 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

Spoken by the serpent that God himself placed in the garden. Of course, if that picture is understood as a real serpent, then the real meaning of it is lost.

Can God do evil? Can God lie? No. Then how is giving a creation these abilities make him in any way like God? It doesn't

Then how is giving a creation judgment alone makes that creation "like God"? It doesn't. We are no more like God than a cat is like God.

To the first two questions above, "Can God do evil? Can God lie"?

Can can not do evil but can deceive, as in like the serpent.

But then again, in our minds deceiving is an evil thing, but in God's eyes, it is not evil but a designed effect.

Case in point: To the Jews God the Father was to them the only way of access.
When Jesus came on the scene, Jesus told them that if they wanted to access the Father they must go through Him first.

So, do you suppose that God did evil by deceiving the Jews into not believing what Jesus said by holding them accountable only to God the Father making Jesus an impostor?

That was a designed effect done by God for our good and none of it was anything evil about it.
For both Jew and Gentile benefited from it.

Therefore, if you claim that our design is not flawed, then you must also claim that the design of a cat is flawed. In either way, God's design was flawed.

A designed flaw looked at by mankind as an unjust evil done us by God.

The designed flaw in mankind was a gift, while for the cat, it wasn't.

And what is wrong with that? Your God supposedly rescued us from a situation that doesn't require rescuing.

But the result of this "rescue" is that it greatly devalued life. What is the meaning of anything you do in this life, if what you stand to gain in the next life is infinitely more valuable?

Suddenly you don't care to contribute all you can in this life. You only care to contribute just a bit more than what would tip the balance against you on the "day of judgment."

What sort of a rescue is that?

"Your God supposedly rescued us from a situation that doesn't require rescuing"

God could not show forth His love if He would have created us in a "lost" condition to abandoned us because of our evil ways.

But instead, despite our evil ways, His love overcame all of it for our benefit.

If you believe in contributing to Society then I commend you.

For if this life was all there is, then the only hope for you would have been the contribution and no more.

But, if you knew that life continued after this life's contribution, you would have advanced the same hope in your decedents making this life more meaningful.

Adding value to this life worth sacrificing. Only by knowing would one even attempt to give up one's own life for others when called to do so.

The beauty of this life is that you have a limited time on this earth, and that is why it is valuable.

I agree with you on the limited time, but not necessarily what makes it valuable.

Case in point: Mar 12:41 And Jesus sat over against the treasury, and beheld how the people cast money into the treasury: and many that were rich cast in much.

Mar 12:42 And there came a certain poor widow, and she threw in two mites, which make a farthing.

Mar 12:43 And he called unto him his disciples, and saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That this poor widow hath cast more in, than all they which have cast into the treasury:
Mar 12:44 For all they did cast in of their abundance; but she of her want did cast in all that she had, even all her living.

Why the sacrifice? Was it because she thought that would be her only work on this earth and nothing more or because she knew the sacrifice was her gift of the heart, out of love, Godly love from which her hope came from knowing that life would be a better place in the here after making this worlds goods of little value?

But you would only contribute to in this life if you can see how your contribution mattered? That's a very selfish view. How is this moral?

If that were the case, then the motive is purely selfish, as you very well stated.

But to contribute to this life is to know the meaning of life here, and in the here after, that would enable you to give of all that you have, for in that other life, you will lack nothing.

That's what prompts one to give, knowing that our time is limited and that our gifts can further the hope of same in our offspring.

I don't view myself as the end purpose of my life. The reason I don't is not because I believe in some theology or some elusive God

The end of your life ends the purpose, how you fared is the worth of it.

And if you have no hope for an after life, then what's the purpose?

Life is constantly changing, and if we contribute to it at the material, social, personal, emotional, or conceptual level, we can make the world a better place for us, our family, our community, our nation, the world, and future generations.

Well said, but is that all? Is that you hope for? Is there not a life after this to which you and all your decedents can one day meet in a world that is not subject to vanity?

We all contribute to the perpetuation of life, and that is the purpose of any living being - human, animal, or plant.

That's the carnal side, but what about the spiritual side? What contribution have you made there?

We have a great capacity to make the world a better place, and make life enjoyable for us and others. Every generation benefits from the contributions of previous generations.

As Newton said: "If I have seen further than other men it's because I have stood on the shoulders of giants."

No argument there.

Quoting Issac Newton:Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done.[8] This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent Being. [...] This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all; and on account of his dominion he is wont to be called "Lord God" παντοκρατωρ [pantokratōr], or "Universal Ruler". [...] The Supreme God is a Being eternal, infinite, [and] absolutely perfect.[4]
Opposition to godliness is atheism in profession and idolatry in practice. Atheism is so senseless and odious to mankind that it never had many professors>>>via WikiPedia.

Standing on shoulders of Giants,is Newtons way of saying, (In my opinion)that he was gifted amongst the intelligent giants of philosophy of which his contributions were well in tune with the views of the purpose of life.

That would certainly be the result, if you don't contribute anything to the world, whether you believe in some imaginary afterlife or not. But if you contribute to life, you are building the foundation for your family, your children, and future generations - the foundation to what could be a paradise on earth. Your "credit" would be that foundation.

You speak as a person with hope except for the last part quote"could be a paradise on earth" could never happen while our abilities are in judgments between good and evil.

The better paradise would not be here but in the after life.

But from what I gather, you don't actually care about your family, children, or future generation. You only care about getting credit for what you've done, whether it was of any substance in this world or not. I believe that's called vanity.

Wrong judgment call.

I've raised my six children with an education towards God and how they can themselves, like as I, overcome many of the obstetrical and challenges in this life and contribute to it in many ways.

What gifts I was given in this life, as little as they may be, are likewise given to my offspring so that they may benefit more from them than I.

I am like a stone, rounded by God's milling, shaped how He wants me, making me a living stone, like none other.

That makes me an individual soul worthy of His love and His sacrifice.

Blessings, AJ

 

[Enoughie]

You mean can a cat judge between right and wrong as like we? No! Because a cat has no intellect like as we, therefore can not discern between what is right or what is wrong.

Only an intelligent being, such as a god can.

You'll have to define for me exactly what "judge between right and wrong" means.

Unless the ability to "judge between right and wrong" is followed by actions that promote what's "right," there's absolutely nothing superior in having this ability.

So if a cat intuitively acts on what's "right," without having a separate mental process through which it can just "think" what's right or wrong (without acting on it), then what is the purpose of having a mental ability that is not translated into action?

If God cannot do evil, then he's more like a cat that intuitively does what's right, and not like a man who can "judge" between right and wrong, and then not do what's right.

To the first two questions above, "Can God do evil? Can God lie"?

Can can not do evil but can deceive, as in like the serpent.

But then again, in our minds deceiving is an evil thing, but in God's eyes, it is not evil but a designed effect.

So the ends justify the means. Sounds like your God was reading up on Saul Alinsky.

There's nothing good in deceit. It undermines trust, which is the basis for human relations.

Case in point: To the Jews God the Father was to them the only way of access.
When Jesus came on the scene, Jesus told them that if they wanted to access the Father they must go through Him first.

So, do you suppose that God did evil by deceiving the Jews into not believing what Jesus said by holding them accountable only to God the Father making Jesus an impostor?

Jesus' claims fundamentally contradicted the Old Testament. If the Old Testament is an unalterable holy text given down by God, then Jesus could not have been the same God as the one in the O.T.

So there was no reason for Jews to believe Jesus.

That was a designed effect done by God for our good and none of it was anything evil about it.
For both Jew and Gentile benefited from it.

Are you sure Jews benefited from this?!

Two thousand years of persecution, and the Church holding all Jews collectively accountable for Jesus' death (which was only repudiated in the 2nd Vatican Council - 1962-5)? Certainly, the holocaust would not have been possible without it.

Are you sure there's nothing evil about this?

God could not show forth His love if He would have created us in a "lost" condition to abandoned us because of our evil ways.

But instead, despite our evil ways, His love overcame all of it for our benefit.

Being alive doesn't mean being "lost" without an afterlife. Just like it doesn't mean being lost without having a "pre-life."

I wasn't alive for billions of years before I was born. It didn't bother me in the slightest.

If you believe in contributing to Society then I commend you.

For if this life was all there is, then the only hope for you would have been the contribution and no more.

But, if you knew that life continued after this life's contribution, you would have advanced the same hope in your decedents making this life more meaningful.

Not if an afterlife is an illusion. In that case you'd be promoting false hope in your descendants.

Adding value to this life worth sacrificing. Only by knowing would one even attempt to give up one's own life for others when called to do so.

No one is "called" to give up his life under normal circumstances. Maybe in war, but I see war as something that should be prevented. Not glorified and promoted, with all the "sacrifice" that's involved.

I don't see contributing to the life of others as a "sacrifice" - you are acting toward building a better society. This is the society you live in. Is building a house for yourself and your children considered a "sacrifice"? I don't think so.

I agree with you on the limited time, but not necessarily what makes it valuable.

Case in point: Mar 12:41 ...

Just because your contribution is subjective, doesn't mean that it has no value. Besides, I view money contributions as the highest form of generosity. Transferring money from one pocket to another does very little to promote a better life. Obviously it helps if you donate to charity and such, but it is better to "grow the pie" than just redistribute the scraps.

Why the sacrifice? Was it because she thought that would be her only work on this earth and nothing more or because she knew the sacrifice was her gift of the heart, out of love, Godly love from which her hope came from knowing that life would be a better place in the here after making this worlds goods of little value?

I support whatever motivates people to do good in this world. But I don't think that the false hope of an afterlife is a worthy motivator.

If that were the case, then the motive is purely selfish, as you very well stated.

But to contribute to this life is to know the meaning of life here, and in the here after, that would enable you to give of all that you have, for in that other life, you will lack nothing.

That's what prompts one to give, knowing that our time is limited and that our gifts can further the hope of same in our offspring.

Your life is borrowed from nature, and to nature it will return. Obviously the point of life is not to collect material possession. But that does not mean that you need a distorted view of reality to understand this.

The end of your life ends the purpose, how you fared is the worth of it.

And if you have no hope for an after life, then what's the purpose?

To enjoy life, and the world a better place. (and if you enjoy making the world a better place, then you get doubt the benefit).

There are also two posts I wrote about this:
Why should We Be Good? : Salvation and Paradise | Natural Philosophy of Life
What Makes Us Happy? : The Pursuit of Happiness | Natural Philosophy of Life

Well said, but is that all? Is that you hope for? Is there not a life after this to which you and all your decedents can one day meet in a world that is not subject to vanity?

This is all?!

Enjoying life and "contributing at the material, social, personal, emotional, or conceptual level and making the world a better place for us, our family, our community, our nation, the world, and future generations" is not enough?!

We must also imagine a world where all people who ever lived - over 200 billion people - will also be there forever? Why is this at all necessary? Why is this world not enough for you?

That's the carnal side, but what about the spiritual side? What contribution have you made there?

You consider: "contributing at the material, social, personal, emotional, or conceptual level" - the "carnal side"?

Then what do you call the "spiritual" side? What is there left? The delusional side? The hallucinatory side? Are any contributions there of any value?

Or do you just mean on the side of values? Because I consider values to be part of the conceptual and social categories.

Or do you just mean in relation to God? Because that's a whole different discussion.

No argument there.

Quoting Issac Newton:..

Standing on shoulders of Giants,is Newtons way of saying, (In my opinion)that he was gifted amongst the intelligent giants of philosophy of which his contributions were well in tune with the views of the purpose of life.

The "standing on the shoulders of giants" was a reference to his contribution to knowledge of physics - not philosophy - which was supported by the research of those who predated him.

But do you really think we should include Newton's religious views in this discussion? Should I quote Einstein's view on life, since he surpassed Newton? I don't think this is relevant.

You speak as a person with hope except for the last part quote"could be a paradise on earth" could never happen while our abilities are in judgments between good and evil.

The better paradise would not be here but in the after life.

Are we incapable of constructing great buildings because of our ability to judge what is good and bad engineering, or because we know the laws of physics? I'd say this knowledge can only help us, not hinder us.

The better we understand the laws of nature, and the natural values, the better a society we can build.

I'd say your pessimism and resignation is unfounded in reality. The only source for this way of thinking can come either from religion or from neurosis.

I don't see anything good in such view. If you don't think we can have a better society, then you wouldn't contribute much to creating such society. Then what exactly is the purpose of your actions? To bring about Armageddon?

Wrong judgment call.

I've raised my six children with an education towards God and how they can themselves, like as I, overcome many of the obstetrical and challenges in this life and contribute to it in many ways.

What gifts I was given in this life, as little as they may be, are likewise given to my offspring so that they may benefit more from them than I.

I am like a stone, rounded by God's milling, shaped how He wants me, making me a living stone, like none other.

That's an interesting way of thinking about life. But again, I don't think giving people false hope is beneficial in any way.

_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

 

[Enoughie]

Just because your contribution is subjective, doesn't mean that it has no value. Besides, I view money contributions as the highest form of generosity. Transferring money from one pocket to another does very little to promote a better life.

I meant to say "I don't view money contributions as the highest form of..."

Couldn't edit the post for some reason.
_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

 

[look3467]

You'll have to define for me exactly what "judge between right and wrong" means.>>>Enoughie

Judge means having the ability to think intelligently to make intelligent decisions between what is morally right and what is not, where animals can not.

So the ends justify the means. Sounds like your God was reading up on Saul Alinsky.

The end of Jesus in the flesh, as God's offering to us for our justification, rather than facing etyernal non existence.

There's nothing good in deceit. It undermines trust, which is the basis for human relations.

True, when deceit is looked upon as an evil deed, but God's work had no evil deeds in it.

What mankind fails to see is the spiritual work of God looking at it through fleshly eyes.

That is the reason for the misunderstanding, or rather "The Mystery".

Jesus' claims fundamentally contradicted the Old Testament. If the Old Testament is an unalterable holy text given down by God, then Jesus could not have been the same God as the one in the O.T.

So there was no reason for Jews to believe Jesus.

Just in that statement, I can see you are completely in the dark about God's works.

There are no contradictions anywhere in the whole bible when viewed spiritually, but are when viewed with fleshly eyes.

The eyes of the flesh can not see spiritual things.

When I say fleshly eyes, means that in order to see the spiritual works of God one has to have the spirit of God in us, then and only then can we see with our spirit.

Are you sure Jews benefited from this?!

Two thousand years of persecution, and the Church holding all Jews collectively accountable for Jesus' death (which was only repudiated in the 2nd Vatican Council - 1962-5)? Certainly, the holocaust would not have been possible without it.

Are you sure there's nothing evil about this?

Absolutely. That was a designed feature, that can only be understood, again, having spiritual eyes to see it.

To quote a scripture: Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

All benefit from Jesus' sacrifice, bar none! Not to see it that way is a mystery.

Being alive doesn't mean being "lost" without an afterlife. Just like it doesn't mean being lost without having a "pre-life."

I wasn't alive for billions of years before I was born. It didn't bother me in the slightest.

The only time that you could have become a living soul, meaning who you are as an individual would be in "time", born in a world of "time".

Your existence as well as mine are due to having been born in the flesh first, then after this the spirit which will live on for eternity with God: Thanked be Jesus.

Not if an afterlife is an illusion. In that case you'd be promoting false hope in your descendants.

False hope only if the afterlife is an illusion, but the hope in me is that it is not, therefore, I live in hope of it.

No one is "called" to give up his life under normal circumstances. Maybe in war, but I see war as something that should be prevented. Not glorified and promoted, with all the "sacrifice" that's involved.

The "no one" you are referencing is Jesus! For He was called for that very purpose, and that was to give up His life for many.

Quote: Joh 17:23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

The "one" Jesus, which to many is "no one" in particular, but to the believer, Jesus is life.

I don't see contributing to the life of others as a "sacrifice" - you are acting toward building a better society. This is the society you live in. Is building a house for yourself and your children considered a "sacrifice"? I don't think so.

Martin Luther, (One of many)driven by a spiritual quest, in "I have a dream" sacrificed his life in the process. For that, the world has become a better place, but not a perfect place.

Just because your contribution is subjective, doesn't mean that it has no value. Besides, I view money contributions as the highest form of generosity. Transferring money from one pocket to another does very little to promote a better life. Obviously it helps if you donate to charity and such, but it is better to "grow the pie" than just redistribute the scraps.

I can sum up your statement in Godly type of love, is what makes the sacrifice worth while.

I support whatever motivates people to do good in this world. But I don't think that the false hope of an afterlife is a worthy motivator.

For a pure motive, one not tainted by any return, is a Godly type of motive recognizing it or not, for it stems from the heart of love in the giving.

Y

our life is borrowed from nature, and to nature it will return. Obviously the point of life is not to collect material possession. But that does not mean that you need a distorted view of reality to understand this.

The only reason for the existence in the flesh is for the trial. Without it, there is no individuality, no life of any kind fleshly or otherwise.

To enjoy life, and the world a better place. (and if you enjoy making the world a better place, then you get doubt the benefit).

True, but purely worldly. You are made with two natures, one spiritual, and the other fleshly.

The one you are entertained by is the fleshly, and have yet to grasp the nature of the spiritual in you.

This is all?!

Enjoying life and "contributing at the material, social, personal, emotional, or conceptual level and making the world a better place for us, our family, our community, our nation, the world, and future generations" is not enough?!

We must also imagine a world where all people who ever lived - over 200 billion people - will also be there forever? Why is this at all necessary? Why is this world not enough for you?

Simple reason! This world, along with myself are imperfect!

There must be, reasonably and intelligent thinking, that there must be a better world than this.

You consider: "contributing at the material, social, personal, emotional, or conceptual level" - the "carnal side"?

Yes, for the work is done in the flesh.

Now, the spiritual contribution to that would be the hope given, that all those contributions lead to the same motive in the world.

Then what do you call the "spiritual" side? What is there left? The delusional side? The hallucinatory side? Are any contributions there of any value?

Or do you just mean on the side of values? Because I consider values to be part of the conceptual and social categories.

Or do you just mean in relation to God? Because that's a whole different discussion.

Look at past human history. Can you see mankind wanting to somehow relate to some spiritual entity by creating an image of that entity?

The god of the harvest, the Sun, the moon, the crops etc.

Surely, there was something in them awakening their spiritual side of their make up.

The "standing on the shoulders of giants" was a reference to his contribution to knowledge of physics - not philosophy - which was supported by the research of those who predated him.

But do you really think we should include Newton's religious views in this discussion? Should I quote Einstein's view on life, since he surpassed Newton? I don't think this is relevant.

Though these be learned individuals in the things of this life, they all in some respect, recognized the existence of a force supporting all there is.

I, being a believer in the Creator God, can take what little is said by these learned man and conclude their spiritual side can be seen in their statements.

Are we incapable of constructing great buildings because of our ability to judge what is good and bad engineering, or because we know the laws of physics? I'd say this knowledge can only help us, not hinder us.

The better we understand the laws of nature, and the natural values, the better a society we can build.

I'd say your pessimism and resignation is unfounded in reality. The only source for this way of thinking can come either from religion or from neurosis.

I don't see anything good in such view. If you don't think we can have a better society, then you wouldn't contribute much to creating such society. Then what exactly is the purpose of your actions? To bring about Armageddon?

First, God created us to manage the earth, the animals hopefully, in a good manner.

But because we have both the ability to reason between two extremes, Good and evil, and being handicapped by being in the flesh, we are inclined to desire the things of the flesh over the spiritual.

That's an interesting way of thinking about life. But again, I don't think giving people false hope is beneficial in any way.

You are within all your God given rights to believe what you want without eternal consequences.

The only consequences that believers and unbelievers alike have in common is that they are all due and payable in the flesh.

Blessings, AJ

 

[Enoughie]

Judge means having the ability to think intelligently to make intelligent decisions between what is morally right and what is not, where animals can not.

Well, we have more than the capacity to intelligently make decisions between what is morally right and wrong. We also have the capacity to make tools, to communicate symbolically through language, and so on.

Every additional capacity we have increases our potential for a better life, it doesn't decrease it. It allows us to have very complex societies, and diverse cultures.

It is perverted way of thinking to conclude that because we have these capacities we are actually worse off.

Other animals have other capacities that allow them to survive. In some terms other animals (or plants) are more advanced than us.

True, when deceit is looked upon as an evil deed, but God's work had no evil deeds in it.

What mankind fails to see is the spiritual work of God looking at it through fleshly eyes.

That is the reason for the misunderstanding, or rather "The Mystery".

Just in that statement, I can see you are completely in the dark about God's works.

There are no contradictions anywhere in the whole bible when viewed spiritually, but are when viewed with fleshly eyes.

The eyes of the flesh can not see spiritual things.

When I say fleshly eyes, means that in order to see the spiritual works of God one has to have the spirit of God in us, then and only then can we see with our spirit.

I understand where you're coming from. I'm familiar with the concept of being "Born Again."

But all this concept really means is that you must accept Jesus Christ as God, and the Bible as the Truth, and you cannot view the Bible or Jesus critically. Otherwise, you are not Born Again (with a living spirit and all that).

Since you consider Jesus to be God, and God cannot do evil, then any action Jesus or the Father do - by definition - cannot be evil.

And anything that is written in the Bible - by definition - cannot be contradictory. Even if something in the Bible is evidently contradictory - to your intellect, emotions, and senses - you must believe that it is not contradictory, because supposedly it "cannot be."

Do you see the inherent problem in this way of thinking?

Your "spirit" and belief have to override ALL your senses and intellect - because supposedly these are "of the flesh," and your "spirit" is superior to them.

Well, for me to accept this outlook on life, you'd have to present overwhelming and incontrovertible evidence to substantiate the claim that Jesus is indeed God, and that the claims made in the Bible are true.

Do you have any evidence to that effect?

Do you have evidence even for the existence of a spirit, outside of your imagination?

If you cannot view the actions of Jesus critically, then surely you'd say that Jesus' actions were all pure and good, and that there are no contradictions in the Bible.

But if you decide to actually use the capacities you have - intellectual, and others - you can clearly see that not all is so peachy in Jesus' actions.

_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

 

[Enoughie]

False hope only if the afterlife is an illusion, but the hope in me is that it is not, therefore, I live in hope of it.

At least you recognize the possibility that you might be wrong. I appreciate that.

Look at past human history. Can you see mankind wanting to somehow relate to some spiritual entity by creating an image of that entity?

The god of the harvest, the Sun, the moon, the crops etc.

Surely, there was something in them awakening their spiritual side of their make up.

We've evolved to communicate through symbols. This capacity is the source for all our art and our myths. But our art and myths are meaningless outside of a living being's ability to appreciate them.

Though these be learned individuals in the things of this life, they all in some respect, recognized the existence of a force supporting all there is.

I, being a believer in the Creator God, can take what little is said by these learned man and conclude their spiritual side can be seen in their statements.

I have no problem with accepting the existence of forces, or of God. But this does not lead to the false conclusion of there being an "afterlife."

Einstein wrote: "I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts. I am satisfied with the mystery of the eternity of life and with the awareness and a glimpse of the marvelous structure of the existing world, together with the devoted striving to comprehend a portion, be it ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in nature."

First, God created us to manage the earth, the animals hopefully, in a good manner.

But because we have both the ability to reason between two extremes, Good and evil, and being handicapped by being in the flesh, we are inclined to desire the things of the flesh over the spiritual.

See my response above.

Our capacities in themselves do not handicap us in any way. What corrupts us is our short-sightedness, and our intellectual laziness.

Instead of trying to truly appreciate life - to see the world as it is, and to recognize the immense potential each and every one of us has in bringing about meaningful change in this world - some prefer the comfort of holding on to unfounded medieval worldviews and values.

The result is ignorance, hypocrisy, self-righteousness, and intolerance. These are the ingredients for conflict. Not our mere physical being.

When looking at 10,000 tons of steel some imagine tanks and bombs, others imagine the Eiffel Tower. It all depends on your education (ie. character).

_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

 

[look3467]

Well, we have more than the capacity to intelligently make decisions between what is morally right and wrong. We also have the capacity to make tools, to communicate symbolically through language, and so on.

Every additional capacity we have increases our potential for a better life, it doesn't decrease it. It allows us to have very complex societies, and diverse cultures.

It is perverted way of thinking to conclude that because we have these capacities we are actually worse off.

Other animals have other capacities that allow them to survive. In some terms other animals (or plants) are more advanced than us.

There's this verse quote: Luk 12:48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

Animals are not given to that which is required. An animal is born, lives its course and either is eaten or dies without any requirement other than to exist for a time.

Not mankind, the gift of intelligence requires testing, as having intelligence enables one to think freely, independent thinking requiring judgment.

Carries consequences.

Thus, mankind through the ages has been making judgments based on whatever information was available to them in their time.

The experience gained through judgments in their lives were passed on to the succeeding generations, progressively growing knowledge to where we are today.

The knowledge of a God, a supreme force in the universe was hidden, but the awareness of it was evident in the many images of gods erected and the many myths over the span of human history.

The ability to reason, to think and make judgments can be good or detrimental.

The rise and fall of nations, over the span of human as history shows us.

So your statement quote "It is perverted way of thinking to conclude that because we have these capacities we are actually worse off", is not a perverted way of thinking, but a reality in light of the consequences of our evil deeds.

I understand where you're coming from. I'm familiar with the concept of being "Born Again."

But all this concept really means is that you must accept Jesus Christ as God, and the Bible as the Truth, and you cannot view the Bible or Jesus critically. Otherwise, you are not Born Again (with a living spirit and all that).

Since you consider Jesus to be God, and God cannot do evil, then any action Jesus or the Father do - by definition - cannot be evil.

If one can not question the existence of God, then one can not be a god or an individual entity apart from God.

The ability to make judgments (Decisions) is a God given gift, therefore, God could not restrict us to a narrow channel of thinking, but instead, we can go as far as we'd like, even to extremes.

That's what makes us as gods, limited only to things of the flesh, power to heal by medicines, to build towers, to manage the earth and the animals.

For the things of the spirit which are not of this world, mankind must tap.

Tapping into the things of the spirit has been mankind's quest since the beginning of time.
As knowledge was given in increments to mankind by revelation, knowledge progressed as that knowledge was employed in the experiences of life.

At a particular point in time in human history, the creator God chose to reveal Himself to us via as one of us, fleshly,by selecting an individual (Abraham) and finishing up with Jesus, a fleshly individual.

All those who lived and died prior to Abraham and Jesus were not excluded in the finished work of God in Jesus, but where included, along with the rest of us and our not yet unborn children as well.

You see, the choice is ours as gods to choose, with what knowledge we now have to whether we want to believe in God or not.

I chose to believe in God because for one I was raised in a Christian home. But at some time in my life, I had the ability to decide for my self whether this thing about God was true or not.

I'm sure you arrived at that point as well.

Because of my relationship with God as a believer, I can see His wonderful works created especially for me, for you and everybody else.

I can appreciate His attention in detail to my everyday living, in that He meets my needs spiritually first, and then He opens doors for me to actively go through in faith.

I mean, I would not have it any other way.

I think of it as like having a million dollars placed in a bank by someone who cared about me and I having knowledge of that fact to use at my discretion, verses, having been given that knowledge and refusing to believe it.

The loss is to the unbeliever.

And anything that is written in the Bible - by definition - cannot be contradictory. Even if something in the Bible is evidently contradictory - to your intellect, emotions, and senses - you must believe that it is not contradictory, because supposedly it "cannot be."

Do you see the inherent problem in this way of thinking?

Lack of understanding of spiritual works of God would, yes, would lead me to believe that the bible is contradictory.

And it was for a time because I questioned it, but in my quest to find the truth in it, God gently, through my research, the trials in my life, has given me revelation to where now I understand His wonderful works.

What I mean by revelation is not like I am some kind of prophet or some religious person, but one who questioned Him and sought after answers with boldness to my questions.

Your "spirit" and belief have to override ALL your senses and intellect - because supposedly these are "of the flesh," and your "spirit" is superior to them.

You've nailed it!

You see, being made as a god, my individuality was geared for the flesh only thus separating me from the Creator, yet, there always was a Godly conscience.

When at the point of my willingness to give all that up for God, then at that point is where I become one with God, or better understood, as being born again.

Being born of God is a rebirth of my once dead spirit, enabling me to access the powers of heaven in my behalf, while I endure in victory the journey through this hellish world.

That is the difference!

Well, for me to accept this outlook on life, you'd have to present overwhelming and incontrovertible evidence to substantiate the claim that Jesus is indeed God, and that the claims made in the Bible are true.

Well, the first step you have already taken and that is to question the existence of God.

What is needed now is for you to make a determination to seek the truth out for yourself, with boldness, not fearing any retribution or consequences in the process.

You see, because this world is geared to destroy us, meaning by decay or corruption, we must fight against it.

In the quest for God, those things will become more evident to dissuade you, to deter you from reaching the truth.

God, knowing your intentions will be there every step of the way, guiding you through the experience, ever gaining ground progressively to a point where your faith in God is solidified.

Anybody seeking God will find Him, so promised.

Do you have any evidence to that effect?

The only evidence I can give you is the testimony of my life with God.

Other than that, you have to experience it your self.

Do you have evidence even for the existence of a spirit, outside of your imagination?

The spirit is my imagination, for there I reason, have life in the flesh to exist.

But am dead to the spiritual things of God unless I am born of His spirit life to augment my spirit in the flesh in victory over the things of the flesh.

The evidence of my rebirth of His spirit is evidenced by how He has helped me along my life, given me hope in the midst of confusion, elevated me above the things of the world to where now, the things of this world become second to the things of God.

If you cannot view the actions of Jesus critically, then surely you'd say that Jesus' actions were all pure and good, and that there are no contradictions in the Bible.

But if you decide to actually use the capacities you have - intellectual, and others - you can clearly see that not all is so peachy in Jesus' actions.

Why Jesus? I mean my question to God was, "If I am the one would deserves to die, why would Jesus, a supposedly a perfect man, die in my place?

Why did we beat Him up and crucified Him, for what? For me?" It didn't make sense and I was just supposed to believe it so?

You see, unless I know what the works of God are, I can not understand the answers to those questions.

Now I know, and Now I understand.

You have to do your own work as everybody else to.

All I can do is state my views based on my experience as a form of help, but other than that, I could not convince anybody.

Blessings, AJ

 

[look3467]

I have no problem with accepting the existence of forces, or of God. But this does not lead to the false conclusion of there being an "afterlife."

If you accept "the existence of forces, or of God" you can not say in the same breath that it is a false conclusion of there not being and "afterlife".

Either one accepts it or rejects it. That is a judgment call after all the evidence is in.
Of course, there is no evidence of proof, only the evidence of faith in action of it.

Einstein wrote: "I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts. I am satisfied with the mystery of the eternity of life and with the awareness and a glimpse of the marvelous structure of the existing world, together with the devoted striving to comprehend a portion, be it ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in nature."

Does a parent correct children whom they love dearly? Does a parent reward children when they accomplish something on their own? Similarly, God does the same.

The very fact that Einstein would even comment on anything of God denotes recognition of that possibility being true, but would rather be content with his own knowledge and allow it to remain a mystery.

Our capacities in themselves do not handicap us in any way. What corrupts us is our short-sightedness, and our intellectual laziness.

Well, let's say you were not alive in the flesh, would you be able to experience any of those things?

But, since you are, then you are handicapped, or enslaved to those things you allow.

Instead of trying to truly appreciate life - to see the world as it is, and to recognize the immense potential each and every one of us has in bringing about meaningful change in this world - some prefer the comfort of holding on to unfounded medieval worldviews and values.

The result is ignorance, hypocrisy, self-righteousness, and intolerance. These are the ingredients for conflict. Not our mere physical being.

When looking at 10,000 tons of steel some imagine tanks and bombs, others imagine the Eiffel Tower. It all depends on your education (ie. character).

There, you see, you just stated the evil potential in the flesh that, unless there is a counter force against it, evil will persevere.

That counter force is good, the other side of your potential.

All that is in the world is available without limit, but all that is good comes with awareness of or knowledge of good (limited) to our acting on it.

Also, good comes with awareness of some laws, and adherents to those laws help us to overcome.

Blessings, AJ

 

[foxjazz]

there is no Christian God outside the mind of the theist.
It is and always will be a delusion semi-shared by many like minded theists.

 

[Enoughie]

"Your "spirit" and belief have to override ALL your senses and intellect - because supposedly these are "of the flesh," and your "spirit" is superior to them."

You've nailed it!

That's not the response I was hoping for. I was referring to the level of credulity needed to adopt such a belief system and worldview.

Just to illustrate this point, here's a little thought experiment:

I presume you believe we have a body, soul and/or spirit, correct?

Now suppose someone comes to you (and other people too) and claims to be the Father God. He performs all sorts of "miracles".. healing the sick, turning water into wine, etc. (you know, the sorts of things most magicians/illusion artists can do, only he's a bit better than average).

Now, this Father God claims that you don't only have a body and spirit, but there's also a fourth dimension to you - your "Essence." Now, he says that the flesh is corrupt, and the spirit is purer, but he says that even the spirit is a bit corrupt because it interacts with the flesh. He then claims that only your "Essence" is truly pure.

He then proceeds to explain his new theology. He also explains that if you believe in Him, not only will your spirit live forever in heaven, but your Essence will become a God, and you will be able to create your own universe - this is how much the Father God loves you! He let's you become a God in your own universe.

But if you fail to believe in this Father God, your Essence will be tortured forever in all the hells of all the worlds that other people's Essences create.


Now, you start to see that there are some perceived contradiction between this new theology, and the Bible. But then he claims that you cannot truly understand this theology because you are not yet born (for a third time) of the Essence.

Since your Essence is purer than the spirit, your Essence OVERRIDES all your senses and intellect, AND your spirit. So if you perceive any contradictions, it is because you weren't born of the Essence.

Of course, all this really means is that you cannot criticize this "God" or his theology, because if you do then your Essence is dead, and you will suffer in all these newly created worlds..

Only if you believe in this Father God will you be able to become a God in your own universe.. after your die.

And how can this Father God demonstrate that he speaks the truth. He says he doesn't have to demonstrate it, you will "feel" it.

Then he also dies, or gets burnt alive, or something like that supposedly demonstrates his eternal love, and then is "resurrected."

Now, millions of people who want to become gods flock to this Father God. Until yet another person comes and claims you don't only have a body, soul, spirit, and essence, but that there's a fifth dimension to you as well. He then proceeds to describe that he's such a loving God that he would give you even greater rewards... after you die.

Now, how would you go about refuting their claims?

Don't you see that all these "Gods" speak to your vanity, when they offer their incredible (yet imaginary) rewards that come after death?

At what point are you going to say: "I don't need your fantastic rewards (and threats), I'm fine with the real life I have, and that's all that is necessary" ?

And at what point are you going to say, "No! We don't have this Nth dimension to us. We are quite complete without this extra illusory dimension, and we don't need this illusory dimension to go into any fantastic place after we die" ?

_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

 

[Enoughie]

If you accept "the existence of forces, or of God" you can not say in the same breath that it is a false conclusion of there not being and "afterlife".

Of course I can.

Accepting the existence of God doesn't mean that "anything is possible."

Can you both accept the existence of God, and think that God can do evil? Or that God is incompetent? Or that God is a poor designer?

No. You cannot.

If I accept the existence of a perfect God who designed this world, that would imply that the design of this world is perfect.

The better the design is, the more intuitive it is - like the design of the iPhone. It doesn't require a cumbersome instruction manual. You can figure out how it works intuitively, through your senses and intellect.

Similarly, we can figure out the laws of nature (which are God's laws) - both the physical, and social (biological) - through our senses and intellect, and by extension, through experiment.

Over time our understanding of the laws of nature becomes more and more refined. The more we understand the physical laws, the better is our technology. The better we understand the (natural) social laws, the more refined our values can become, and the better is our society.

The point is that a perfect and intuitive design does not require a cumbersome instruction manual (Bible). In fact, it doesn't require a manual at all.

I wrote a post about this issue here: Is Steve Jobs a Greater Designer and Visionary than the Biblical God? | Natural Philosophy of Life

If someone claims to have received such a manual from God, I would not believe him - because what is implied in his statement is that God's design is not perfect - That God's laws cannot be understood with our sense and intellect, and that we cannot rely on these God given gifts to understand God's world.

If someone claims that God dictated a second (N.T.) or third (Quran) manual - these would only make God more and more incompetent. I simply cannot accept such a God.

So whatever comes from such "prophets" would by definition contradict God's perfection. If such prophet claims that there's an afterlife - something that in essence cannot be grasped through the sense, but requires a "spirit," or another dimension we don't have (see my post above), I cannot accept that. Because it contradicts the perfection of God's design. I cannot accept the idea that God's design can only be understood, not by the strength of our senses, but by the weakness of our credulity. This would make God's design, not only counter-intuitive (and therefore imperfect), but also suggest that God doesn't know how to properly communicate with his creation (that's why you have so many different religions, and different sects within religions. It doesn't make sense that God would decide to communicate to us through such an unreliable channel).

I refuse to accept the idea of an imperfect, or incompetent God.

_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

 

[BruceDLimber]

>How much does the Christian God really love us?

Enough that Baha'is, who worship the same One God as all the other great religions--Christianity included--, have this in their scriptures:

"O SON OF MAN!

"Veiled in My immemorial being and in the ancient eternity of My essence, I knew My love for thee: therefore I created thee, have engraved on thee Mine image, and revealed to thee My beauty."

--The Hidden Words, Part One, #3

Best!

Bruce

 

[sky dancer]

What if God is love?

 

[Enoughie]

>How much does the Christian God really love us?

Enough that Baha'is, who worship the same One God as all the other great religions--Christianity included--, have this in their scriptures:

"O SON OF MAN!

"Veiled in My immemorial being and in the ancient eternity of My essence, I knew My love for thee: therefore I created thee, have engraved on thee Mine image, and revealed to thee My beauty."

--The Hidden Words, Part One, #3

I think it would be wise to judge this God not only by what he claims in the scriptures but also what he does.

God may claim he loves us all dearly, but this is the God who (supposedly) exterminated nearly all of humanity during the great flood.
_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

 

[look3467]

God may claim he loves us all dearly, but this is the God who (supposedly) exterminated nearly all of humanity during the great flood.>>>Enoughie

Let's analyze how the word "flood" is used in this case.

The word flood means inundated right? Completely submerged right?

If we took all of humanities sins to mean "flood" and a single ark (Jesus)rested atop of the waters (Sins), then we could conclude that God rested Jesus over all those sins, to cover them unto a new land, a new world.

When Jesus was arrested, after having taken the sins of the world upon His shoulders,(Ark), then He was bound hand and feet.

Thereby, had to be lifted up (Ark over the waters), the waters being the men carrying Jesus bound hand and foot.

The ark (Jesus) then had to carry it over the flood unto a better place, a new world, the new Jerusalem.

Ref:Mat 22:13 Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Jesus being rejected by all, and having the sins of the whole world, being beaten, spit upon, having a crown of thorns placed on His head, having to carry the weight of it all as the cross and as the final victory, without condemnation, speaking not a word against, but rather, asking the Father to forgive them, nailed it all to the cross.

If one can not imagine that scenario as being in "outer darkness" then we are missing the whole works of God.

The weeping and gnashing of teeth was on those who placed Him on the cross, having doubting fear that what they just did would have dire consequences.

If Jesus did not demonstrate perfect love in all He suffered, then you could say that God is not a loving God.

But because Jesus said not a word, and submitted to the rule of man to be condemned, punished and sentenced to death by crucifixion, having asked forgiveness in spite of all that, surely, to a rational thinking person, would believe that Jesus' works reflected the exact image of God's love.

So, if one wants to argue, debate whether a small piece of a puzzle fits or not, then the proof can only be if the pieces fit together properly to where we can see the whole picture as one.

Blessings, AJ

 

[BruceDLimber]

I think it would be wise to judge this God not only by what he claims in the scriptures but also what he does.

Fear not: we do!


God may claim he loves us all dearly, but this is the God who (supposedly) exterminated nearly all of humanity during the great flood.

EXCEPT, of course, that it's a metaphorical story, not a literal one (as most people will tell you)!

And I assume you're smarter than to take the Bible literally.

Peace,

Bruce