407 replies to this topic

[Golan]

CommanderJB, on 26 Apr 2009, 2:50, said:

Golan, on 26 Apr 2009, 6:04, said:

CommanderJB, on 25 Apr 2009, 16:02, said:

ultimentra, on 25 Apr 2009, 14:42, said:

You hit it right on the mark JB! Thats pretty much what I am saying. We have bad times so that we can appreciate the good times.

So an all-loving god happily inflicts evil on people he sent his son to die to save. Right.

Our live is just a transition anyways, so the pain we have to endure is well worth the lessons we learn for the next step of our journey.

ultimentra, on 26 Apr 2009, 11:27, said:

Exactly, god gives us evil so that we may distinguish it from good. So that we can recognize it when we see it. this is becoming a circle of thoughts from me. I feel like I keep repeating myself. YES god gives us evil, YES god gives us good. But if he only gave us good, and happiness, how would we truely know what evil is without having experienced it?

Why do you need to experience evil in the first place? Why do you need the lessons of suffering if you can spend your life in eternal peace and harmony? Why would god even care if his people 'knew how good they had it' so long as he knew he'd saved them from themselves?

Why do you need to live in the first place? Why do you need to know how things work? Why do you need to have fun? Why do you need to have the urge to nail that girl you were in love with at the age of 22? Where's the difference in this being God's ineffable plan or The Universe's ineffable plan?
It's the human nature to try to experience our existence to its fullest extent and to learn from it. All the losses I had to take in my life, all the pain I had to endure did, in retrospect, enrich my life. If you don't feel like this I truly pity you, as you endured all the losses and pain in your life for naught then.

[CommanderJB]

Golan, on 26 Apr 2009, 17:39, said:

Why do you need to live in the first place?

According to the theory under discussion here, because God wanted company.

Golan, on 26 Apr 2009, 17:39, said:

Why do you need to know how things work?

I don't, and nor did I say that I did.

Golan, on 26 Apr 2009, 17:39, said:

Why do you need to have fun?

I don't, and nor did I say that I did.

Golan, on 26 Apr 2009, 17:39, said:

Why do you need to have the urge to nail that girl you were in love with at the age of 22?

I'm seventeen, so the point is irrelevant, but according to the theory under discussion here it's because we are made to love one another and find life-long solace with a partner of the opposite sex, and have children who we can also teach love and respect so that God can have more friends without needing to go through that whole messy business with dust and ribs all over again. According to a rather more practical theory it's because the urge to mate is necessary for the survival of the species, which is what a strange concoction of chemicals has decided through considerable trial and error is best for whatever reason.

Golan, on 26 Apr 2009, 17:39, said:

Where's the difference in this being God's ineffable plan or The Universe's ineffable plan?

Because we're discussing god's plan? (Also, a personal request, could you use a lighter coloured text in future? It is somewhat difficult to read on a dark background.)

Golan, on 26 Apr 2009, 17:39, said:

It's the human nature to try to experience our existence to its fullest extent and to learn from it. All the losses I had to take in my life, all the pain I had to endure did, in retrospect, enrich my life. If you don't feel like this I truly pity you, as you endured all the losses and pain in your life for naught then.

Whatever your personal view, the theory under discussion is that we were made to suffer by a god who could have prevented by forgiving Eve her munch of an apple and showing her why it would have been bad with a bit of a telling off, and then provided a way to attain 'salvation' several billion or perhaps trillion lives later to a small bunch of the population which involved a poor guy being nailed to a cross. I don't feel that I must inflict pain on myself in order to live a good life; I have been incredibly fortunate in the circumstances I have enjoyed in my time so far, but that doesn't stop me from rejoicing every day at being alive. Neither, if god truly loved his children, would he take the view that they had to suffer evil and countless of them would know eternal torment in order for a select few to truly appreciate him. If god's love was all that is claimed in the Bible, do you truly think that there would be anyone who would not rejoice in it, whether or not they have known evil in their short mortal span?

[SorataZ]

Adding to JB, the 'eternal torment' is such a stupid idea anyway: a mortal (human) can only do a limited amount of sins in his limited life, and we cannot do anything against it, because (from your religious pov) Lilith rejected her stupid and incompetent Adam and Eve took that damn apple, so it is our nature after all. So yeah, an eternal hell is not justificable (nor is it fair), and if God would love us all, he would make us suffer AT MAX the same amount of pain we produced in our small lifes. God would not stand there doing nothing while his evil comrade Satan takes God's precious invention called humankind (I pitty the word menkind btw because its sexistic).

[CodeCat]

Man originally meant human so that might explain the term.

[Alias]

KamuiK, on 26 Apr 2009, 20:01, said:

Adding to JB, the 'eternal torment' is such a stupid idea anyway: a mortal (human) can only do a limited amount of sins in his limited life, and we cannot do anything against it, because (from your religious pov) Lilith rejected her stupid and incompetent Adam and Eve took that damn apple, so it is our nature after all. So yeah, an eternal hell is not justificable (nor is it fair), and if God would love us all, he would make us suffer AT MAX the same amount of pain we produced in our small lifes. God would not stand there doing nothing while his evil comrade Satan takes God's precious invention called humankind (I pitty the word menkind btw because its sexistic).

Who on earth is Lilith...?
As a Quaker, an afterlife is shrouded in mystery and I tend not to think about it.

[ultimentra]

You mean this kind of quaker Alias?

[Libains]

Alias, on 26 Apr 2009, 15:14, said:

KamuiK, on 26 Apr 2009, 20:01, said:

Adding to JB, the 'eternal torment' is such a stupid idea anyway: a mortal (human) can only do a limited amount of sins in his limited life, and we cannot do anything against it, because (from your religious pov) Lilith rejected her stupid and incompetent Adam and Eve took that damn apple, so it is our nature after all. So yeah, an eternal hell is not justificable (nor is it fair), and if God would love us all, he would make us suffer AT MAX the same amount of pain we produced in our small lifes. God would not stand there doing nothing while his evil comrade Satan takes God's precious invention called humankind (I pitty the word menkind btw because its sexistic).

Who on earth is Lilith...?
As a Quaker, an afterlife is shrouded in mystery and I tend not to think about it.

Lilith is one of the three first humans in Christianity, associated frequently with the role of one of the first humans in multiple religions, including that as the wife of Adam in Hebrew. She has so many different roles however, it is very easy to confuse her actual role in any single religion.

ultimentra, on 26 Apr 2009, 21:09, said:

You mean this kind of quaker Alias?

Thoroughly useless post there Ultimentra. Totally, thoroughly, useless. Here's what a Quaker truly is: Religious Society of Friends

[BeefJeRKy]

ultimentra, on 26 Apr 2009, 16:09, said:

You mean this kind of quaker Alias?

While I can see your attempt at humor, please try to contribute better to the thread. There's a reason why its isn't in the SYD.

[Alias]

AJ, on 27 Apr 2009, 6:16, said:

Alias, on 26 Apr 2009, 15:14, said:

KamuiK, on 26 Apr 2009, 20:01, said:

Adding to JB, the 'eternal torment' is such a stupid idea anyway: a mortal (human) can only do a limited amount of sins in his limited life, and we cannot do anything against it, because (from your religious pov) Lilith rejected her stupid and incompetent Adam and Eve took that damn apple, so it is our nature after all. So yeah, an eternal hell is not justificable (nor is it fair), and if God would love us all, he would make us suffer AT MAX the same amount of pain we produced in our small lifes. God would not stand there doing nothing while his evil comrade Satan takes God's precious invention called humankind (I pitty the word menkind btw because its sexistic).

Who on earth is Lilith...?
As a Quaker, an afterlife is shrouded in mystery and I tend not to think about it.

Lilith is one of the three first humans in Christianity, associated frequently with the role of one of the first humans in multiple religions, including that as the wife of Adam in Hebrew. She has so many different roles however, it is very easy to confuse her actual role in any single religion.

According to which source? Even in the most literal biblical interpretation there is no mention of a Lilith being the third human.

[BeefJeRKy]

According to what I gathered from Wikipedia, Lilith is also known as Lamia (which is her name in my Arabic Bible) and is also mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Linky
EDIT: She represents Babylon?

Edited by Scope, 26 April 2009 - 21:11.

[Libains]

It all depends on the religion - admittedly I got that bit wrong there Alias - mean Judaism not Christianity - in which she is seen as a third human. In the Bible interpretation she is seen as a Screech Owl, thus interpreted as a goddess of the night... There are so many interpretations I'm doubtful we will ever know what she represents in each religion though.

[SorataZ]

Afaik, Lilith was the first wife of Adam being created in the same way as him, but she was bored and annoyed of his stupidity and incompetence to see the grace of God. She rejected Adam making God very, very angry so He abandoned her. She left to an area with demons and stuff, while God then created Eve out of Adam's ripe. Actually, I did not know this only counts for Judaism though. The name/word Lilith itself is also often compared to a high demoness or something (btw, a Lamia is afaik a combination of a snake and a human woman, I did not know this meaning about Lilith either).

[Alias]

Christians do use the Jewish half of the bible... if it's true in one, it's true in both. Since it's false in one, it's false in both.

[SorataZ]

Alias, on 26 Apr 2009, 23:38, said:

Christians do use the Jewish half of the bible... if it's true in one, it's true in both. Since it's false in one, it's false in both.

How do you mean that? The christian bible has some differences to the jewish one because of the translation.

[WNxMastrefubu]

IIRC islam, christianity, and judiasm all see the tanakh* (jewish bible) as true

*spellling is probs wrong

Edited by WNxMastrefubu, 26 April 2009 - 21:44.

[BeefJeRKy]

KamuiK, on 26 Apr 2009, 17:42, said:

Alias, on 26 Apr 2009, 23:38, said:

Christians do use the Jewish half of the bible... if it's true in one, it's true in both. Since it's false in one, it's false in both.

How do you mean that? The christian bible has some differences to the jewish one because of the translation.

Early Christians spoke Aramaic which was a spoken dialect of hebrew. They weren't completely different meanings even when translated to Greek, Arabic, and Latin.

[SorataZ]

Scope, on 26 Apr 2009, 23:48, said:

KamuiK, on 26 Apr 2009, 17:42, said:

Alias, on 26 Apr 2009, 23:38, said:

Christians do use the Jewish half of the bible... if it's true in one, it's true in both. Since it's false in one, it's false in both.

How do you mean that? The christian bible has some differences to the jewish one because of the translation.

Early Christians spoke Aramaic which was a spoken dialect of hebrew. They weren't completely different meanings even when translated to Greek, Arabic, and Latin.

That is not what I meant. I do know Jesus spoke Aramaic too, but some people always compare the Bible they have at home with the others and think everything is translated just fine which is not the case IMO. The scrolls found at the dead sea (I already mentioned them) have a lot of other context than the common house bible and the Vatican believes they are fake.

[Alias]

Language isn't the topic of discussion, nor is translation, both are irrelevant to what I said anyway. The Christian "Old Testament" is the same as the Jewish Tanakh. The text is the same, even if the language may not be. That is my point.

[ultimentra]

Thought I would try. Anyways, something I fail to understand why people (like neo Nazis) hate people of the jewish faith. Would this be the proper place to discuss?

[CommanderJB]

No, it wouldn't. In fact, if one was being ever so technical most of this thread is actually 'off-topic' as there is no discussion question posed in the first post, but I think it's prudent to let it continue along the lines of a discussion as to why we do or do not believe our chosen system.

Edited by CommanderJB, 27 April 2009 - 06:10.

[BeefJeRKy]

ultimentra, on 27 Apr 2009, 2:06, said:

Thought I would try. Anyways, something I fail to understand why people (like neo Nazis) hate people of the jewish faith. Would this be the proper place to discuss?

Start your own thread?

[SorataZ]

ultimentra, on 27 Apr 2009, 8:06, said:

Thought I would try. Anyways, something I fail to understand why people (like neo Nazis) hate people of the jewish faith. Would this be the proper place to discuss?

This came because of their christian extremism. In fact, the christian religion has something against the jewish religion, because the jews killed Jesus by nailing him on the cross (not to mention Jesus was a jew himself). Therefore, those people believed in the words of the austrian painter because most of them were hardcore christians. The austrian painter even managed it sometimes after his speeches to make all people say 'Amen'. And while times goes around, but people do not really change, the people today do the same things like the people once ago. It is the same kind of crusade which the christians did 800 years before, 60 years before and what the arabian terrorists do today as well.

[Ion Cannon!]

KamuiK, on 27 Apr 2009, 10:10, said:

ultimentra, on 27 Apr 2009, 8:06, said:

Thought I would try. Anyways, something I fail to understand why people (like neo Nazis) hate people of the jewish faith. Would this be the proper place to discuss?

This came because of their christian extremism. In fact, the christian religion has something against the jewish religion, because the jews killed Jesus by nailing him on the cross (not to mention Jesus was a jew himself). Therefore, those people believed in the words of the austrian painter because most of them were hardcore christians. The austrian painter even managed it sometimes after his speeches to make all people say 'Amen'. And while times goes around, but people do not really change, the people today do the same things like the people once ago. It is the same kind of crusade which the christians did 800 years before, 60 years before and what the arabian terrorists do today as well.

Your comparing the crusades to the holocaust and terrorism? Learn your history.

[SorataZ]

Ion Cannon!, on 27 Apr 2009, 15:45, said:

KamuiK, on 27 Apr 2009, 10:10, said:

ultimentra, on 27 Apr 2009, 8:06, said:

Thought I would try. Anyways, something I fail to understand why people (like neo Nazis) hate people of the jewish faith. Would this be the proper place to discuss?

This came because of their christian extremism. In fact, the christian religion has something against the jewish religion, because the jews killed Jesus by nailing him on the cross (not to mention Jesus was a jew himself). Therefore, those people believed in the words of the austrian painter because most of them were hardcore christians. The austrian painter even managed it sometimes after his speeches to make all people say 'Amen'. And while times goes around, but people do not really change, the people today do the same things like the people once ago. It is the same kind of crusade which the christians did 800 years before, 60 years before and what the arabian terrorists do today as well.

Your comparing the crusades to the holocaust and terrorism? Learn your history.

Yes I do, because slaughtering people is always bad, no matter for what reason. Learn your law books.

[Alias]

KamuiK, on 28 Apr 2009, 0:37, said:

Ion Cannon!, on 27 Apr 2009, 15:45, said:

KamuiK, on 27 Apr 2009, 10:10, said:

ultimentra, on 27 Apr 2009, 8:06, said:

Thought I would try. Anyways, something I fail to understand why people (like neo Nazis) hate people of the jewish faith. Would this be the proper place to discuss?

This came because of their christian extremism. In fact, the christian religion has something against the jewish religion, because the jews killed Jesus by nailing him on the cross (not to mention Jesus was a jew himself). Therefore, those people believed in the words of the austrian painter because most of them were hardcore christians. The austrian painter even managed it sometimes after his speeches to make all people say 'Amen'. And while times goes around, but people do not really change, the people today do the same things like the people once ago. It is the same kind of crusade which the christians did 800 years before, 60 years before and what the arabian terrorists do today as well.

Your comparing the crusades to the holocaust and terrorism? Learn your history.

Yes I do, because slaughtering people is always bad, no matter for what reason. Learn your law books.

Do you support armed forces for your country?

Edited by Alias, 27 April 2009 - 14:41.