Archive for nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Nglreturns is a forum to discuss religion, philosophy, ethics etc...

NGLReturns Daily Quiz - Play here!
 



       nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Christian chat
JamesJah

Man is nothing like the Almighty God

If man gave up listening to Almighty God's direction, why does he think any one would want to listen to his?

Look at the mess he has made so far.
Shaker

That line of, for want of a far better word, "argumentation" founders on a rather large and (usually) completely obvious rock.

Which is namely that for people who believe in a theistic god (a deistic one doesn't really apply), that entity has to be responsible for everything that happens - not only the good but the bad, the wrong, the downright wicked and outright evil as well. Anything else - that well-worn tactic of ascribing all the bad stuff to man/natural causes and all the good stuff to that god - is nakedly contemptible special pleading. This means that while "god" is responsible for charity and kindness, it is also responsible for famine and rectal cancer. There's no way around this. It's either one or the other.

In a natural, godless universe, however, while human beings are certainly responsible for Bergen-Belsen and the Rape of Nanking, they're also responsible for the Salk polio vaccine and good drains. That's exactly what I'd expect of what Christopher Hitchens called the overdeveloped apes with over-active adrenal glands which we actually are. The world isn't a mess; the world is the world. That's it. As Nietzsche so rightly said (he was usually right), the Christian resolution to find the world ugly and bad has made the world ugly and bad.

In short, if you start from the premise, as Christians are committed to do, that the world is essentially a factory reject supposedly created by a perfect being of perfect knowledge, infinite goodness and unlimited power but who disclaims any responsibility for its conduct, a world inherently wrong/damaged/broken from the get-go and the humans in it as intrinsically and inherently flawed when compared to some ridiculously unattainable lunatic fantasy of "perfection," of course you're going to see the world as a mess. It isn't. The world is a world, full of lots and lots and lots of different kinds of people doing different kinds of things, some good, some bad.

For all its woes and imperfections the world is as it is and most people, while understanding the need for and wanting to see change, tacitly like it the way it is by continuing to live in it. The god of theism depicts an entity said to be capable of creating a universe out of nothing but who on any dispassionate, disinterested reading of theistic scriptures actually reveals an entity unfit to run a whelk stall.
ELEVENSES81

In a natural, godless universe, however, while human beings are certainly responsible for Bergen-Belsen and the Rape of Nanking, they're also responsible for the Salk polio vaccine and good drains

Good post Shaker.

What you imply of course is that although the universe may be godless, we are capable of confronting our freedom and making moral choices. One could argue that vile doctrines like National Socialism or the cult of the military as exemplified by Japan in the first half of the 20th century, are a fallback into deterministic blindness in which any vile act can be justified. 'It's not my fault, I'm part of an historical process over which I have no control'. The sublimation of personal freedom to causes such as these are the price we pay for also being able to engage with the noble.  
cyberman

ELEVENSES81 wrote:
while human beings are certainly responsible for Bergen-Belsen and the Rape of Nanking, they're also responsible for the Salk polio vaccine and good drains

Good post Shaker.  


Not a bad post as far as it goes, I suppose - but what is it gainsaying? Has anyone claimed that anyone other than humans should take the credit for good drains?
JamesJah

cyberman wrote:
ELEVENSES81 wrote:
while human beings are certainly responsible for Bergen-Belsen and the Rape of Nanking, they're also responsible for the Salk polio vaccine and good drains

Good post Shaker.  


Not a bad post as far as it goes, I suppose - but what is it gainsaying? Has anyone claimed that anyone other than humans should take the credit for good drains?


Vegetables grow franticly well when they have good manure, that some one does not charge you for getting rid of.

People do not have to live in cities if they can live at piece with each other.
Shaker

cyberman wrote:
Not a bad post as far as it goes, I suppose - but what is it gainsaying? Has anyone claimed that anyone other than humans should take the credit for good drains?


Ultimately theism does this, surely, ascribing ultimate, not proximate, goods and goodness to God. Consider doxology - in Protestant circles the passage known simply as The Doxology has a first line which runs Praise God, from whom all blessings flow.

Now the theist is inserting an extra link into the chain. Clever, kindly, philanthropic, humanitarian people certainly create vaccines that cure diseases, give billions to the needy, look after disabled kids and suffering animals and so forth, but on the theistic view this goodness is ultimately of God working in/through such noble individuals, isn't it? The naturalistic view has a chain of two links only which goes: nice people - good things (in that order) whereas the theistic view has three: God - nice people - good things (ditto). The naturalistic view, as usual, is the simpler.
JamesJah

When gas some one been able to live without telling some one ells the he is doing it wrong?

Why is it the biggest bully gets to have it the way he wants it?

What's so good about the Arab way of life they want to dump it on every one?
Jim

Wot the blood and stomach pills have Arabs got to do with it?
Orthodox Christian Arabs?
Palestinian Christian Arabs?
Evangelical Christian Arabs?
Coptic Arabs?

---oh, surely not MOSLEM Arabs?
Which sect?
There are at least 123 sects and sub-sects of Islam amid Arab culture, some diametrically opposed to each other.

Or are you being racist and meaning ALL Arabs?
cyberman

Shaker wrote:
cyberman wrote:
Not a bad post as far as it goes, I suppose - but what is it gainsaying? Has anyone claimed that anyone other than humans should take the credit for good drains?


Ultimately theism does this, surely, ascribing ultimate, not proximate, goods and goodness to God. Consider doxology - in Protestant circles the passage known simply as The Doxology has a first line which runs Praise God, from whom all blessings flow.

Now the theist is inserting an extra link into the chain. Clever, kindly, philanthropic, humanitarian people certainly create vaccines that cure diseases, give billions to the needy, look after disabled kids and suffering animals and so forth, but on the theistic view this goodness is ultimately of God working in/through such noble individuals, isn't it? The naturalistic view has a chain of two links only which goes: nice people - good things (in that order) whereas the theistic view has three: God - nice people - good things (ditto). The naturalistic view, as usual, is the simpler.


But saying that it is God who made good people doesn't mean that you are denying that those good people have done what they have done, does it?
Shaker

cyberman wrote:
But saying that it is God who made good people doesn't mean that you are denying that those good people have done what they have done, does it?


Goodness me, no.

Thank heavens I never said that. I've said what I've said - the theistic approach is a three-links-in-the-chain approach: God - good people - good deeds. The theistic three-links-in-the-chain approach at the very least does imply that the good things done by good people may not have ever been done without God as the fons et origo of all good as that first link in the chain. This is rarely explicitly stated as atheists-have no-morality anymore, but it was common enough in the distant past and still does crop up here and there from time to time. It's not denying that good people have done what they've done; it's stating that the ultimate (rather than the proximate) basis for that good is God. Human beings may be in the middle of the chain, but the chain begins (or ends) with God, from whom all etc. etc. This is pretty basic theism, isn't it?

The naturalistic, non-theistic account of reality says that humans do good things because we're a social primate. We're an ape which lives in groups and we have to get along pretty well most of the time. What we do to get along is what we have arbitrarily come to know as 'good'. Cooperation is good. Altruism is good. Sharing limited resources is good. Basic charity and kindness are good. Deceit is bad. Stealing is bad. Making somebody experience pain is bad. And so on. There's no evidence whatever that there's any such thing as any absolute and ultimate, independent-of-what-anybody-thinks-about-it good but much evidence that we have ascribed the term good to this thing and that thing for evolutionarily prudential reasons.

The opposite view, the theistic/supernaturalist view, is to act like the Texas sharpshooter (the Texas sharpshooter being the one who fires his gun into a barn door and draws a bullseye around the hole afterwards); it's to assume that there's an external, some say transcendent, one might say Platonic idea of good in the first place and then to go looking for it. It's creating a concept - 'good' - and then going to look for anything which fits the description, rather than vice versa as Ralph Waldo Emerson had it:

Quote:
Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this


I suspect that a considerable number of religious people fight shy of this naturalistic view, and in some cases actively reject it with a suspicious degree of heated emotional investment, because they fear that it means that what we humans have come to regard as right/good and wrong/bad are essentially arbitrary and the result of evolutionary accident - things fell out this particular way but need not have done so; they are like this but they could have been otherwise and there's no absolute and immutable grounding behind it.

They are, as far as I can see, perfectly right to think so. That they are bothered by it is their problem, not mine.
JamesJah

When did God give Christians a religion?
Jim

[quote="JamesJah:122780"]When did God give Christians a religion?

-
No.
JamesJah

[quote="Jim:122782"]
JamesJah wrote:
When did God give Christians a religion?

-
No.


Then what is a Christian?
Jim

[quote="JamesJah:122787"]
Jim wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
When did God give Christians a religion?

-
No.


Then what is a Christian?


-
Someone who accepts Christ for who He says He is.
JamesJah

[quote="Jim:122789"]
JamesJah wrote:
Jim wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
When did God give Christians a religion?

-
No.


Then what is a Christian?


-
Someone who accepts Christ for who He says He is.


The why do you keep saying what the apostate church sais about him?
Jim

When have I ever agreed with anything the WTBTS says about Him?
JamesJah

Jim wrote:
When have I ever agreed with anything the WTBTS says about Him?


When have you agreed on what your bible teaches?

John 14:28
I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I am.
Jim

JamesJah wrote:
Jim wrote:
When have I ever agreed with anything the WTBTS says about Him?


When have you agreed on what your bible teaches?

-
If you think I'm going to waste my time arguing fruitlessly with a member of a pseudochristian cult which specialises in the art of deception, mistranslation and false prophesies, James, think again.

(Mind you, Beth Sarim WAS  a nice bit of real estate.
Pity Moses and Elijah didn't show up to drive the Cadillac!)

John 14:28
I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I am.
JamesJah

Jim wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Jim wrote:
When have I ever agreed with anything the WTBTS says about Him?


When have you agreed on what your bible teaches?

-
If you think I'm going to waste my time arguing fruitlessly with a member of a pseudochristian cult which specialises in the art of deception, mistranslation and false prophesies, James, think again.

(Mind you, Beth Sarim WAS  a nice bit of real estate.
Pity Moses and Elijah didn't show up to drive the Cadillac!)

John 14:28
I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I am.



Who is doing Gods will as Jesus wished it to take place?

Why does he hand the kingdom over to his father if he is his equal?

Malachi 4:5, 6
Look! I am sending to you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and awe-inspiring day of Jehovah. And he will turn the hearts of fathers back toward sons, and the hearts of sons back toward fathers; so that I may not come and strike the earth, devoting it to destruction.

Is he ease to spot?

(Matthew 17:10-13
However, the disciples put the question to him: “Why, then, do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?” In reply he said: “Elijah is indeed coming and will restore all things.

However, I say to you that Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him but did whatever they wanted with him.

In this way also, the Son of man is going to suffer at their hands.” 13 Then the disciples perceived that he spoke to them about John the Baptist.
Jim

JamesJah wrote:
Jim wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Jim wrote:
When have I ever agreed with anything the WTBTS says about Him?


When have you agreed on what your bible teaches?

-
If you think I'm going to waste my time arguing fruitlessly with a member of a pseudochristian cult which specialises in the art of deception, mistranslation and false prophesies, James, think again.

(Mind you, Beth Sarim WAS  a nice bit of real estate.
Pity Moses and Elijah didn't show up to drive the Cadillac!)

John 14:28
I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I am.



Who is doing Gods will as Jesus wished it to take place?

Why does he hand the kingdom over to his father if he is his equal?

Malachi 4:5, 6
Look! I am sending to you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and awe-inspiring day of Jehovah. And he will turn the hearts of fathers back toward sons, and the hearts of sons back toward fathers; so that I may not come and strike the earth, devoting it to destruction.

Is he ease to spot?

(Matthew 17:10-13
However, the disciples put the question to him: “Why, then, do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?” In reply he said: “Elijah is indeed coming and will restore all things.

However, I say to you that Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him but did whatever they wanted with him.

In this way also, the Son of man is going to suffer at their hands.” 13 Then the disciples perceived that he spoke to them about John the Baptist.

-
See previous post.
JamesJah

Do not tell me let me guess Jim you are still looking for Elijah?

That the problem most Jews had in Jesus day and the same problem people who call themselves Christian have today.


The clue is in the work he had to do, when can you find a man doing that work?
Jim

JamesJah wrote:
Do not tell me let me guess Jim you are still looking for Elijah?

That the problem most Jews had in Jesus day and the same problem people who call themselves Christian have today.


The clue is in the work he had to do, when can you find a man doing that work?


-
Eh?
I'm not a member of the bunch of nut jobs who bought a mansion for Moses, Elijah and, very possibly Elvis, given their track record on insanity, to chill out in!
JamesJah

Jim wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Do not tell me let me guess Jim you are still looking for Elijah?

That the problem most Jews had in Jesus day and the same problem people who call themselves Christian have today.


The clue is in the work he had to do, when can you find a man doing that work?


-
Eh?
I'm not a member of the bunch of nut jobs who bought a mansion for Moses, Elijah and, very possibly Elvis, given their track record on insanity, to chill out in!


How come you have so many problems then in understanding scripture and what a Christian should be?
Jim

JamesJah wrote:
Jim wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Do not tell me let me guess Jim you are still looking for Elijah?

That the problem most Jews had in Jesus day and the same problem people who call themselves Christian have today.


The clue is in the work he had to do, when can you find a man doing that work?


-
Eh?
I'm not a member of the bunch of nut jobs who bought a mansion for Moses, Elijah and, very possibly Elvis, given their track record on insanity, to chill out in!


How come you have so many problems then in understanding scripture and what a Christian should be?


-
I have no problems in understanding Scripture.
Since I AM Christian, I know what a Christian should be.

The WTBTS understanding of Scripture is correctly rejected by Christians.
JamesJah

Jim wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Jim wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Do not tell me let me guess Jim you are still looking for Elijah?

That the problem most Jews had in Jesus day and the same problem people who call themselves Christian have today.


The clue is in the work he had to do, when can you find a man doing that work?


-
Eh?
I'm not a member of the bunch of nut jobs who bought a mansion for Moses, Elijah and, very possibly Elvis, given their track record on insanity, to chill out in!


How come you have so many problems then in understanding scripture and what a Christian should be?


-
I have no problems in understanding Scripture.
Since I AM Christian, I know what a Christian should be.

The WTBTS understanding of Scripture is correctly rejected by Christians.


So where did you get your bible teaching from as you are happy to drink blood, which was an anathema to early Christians, and adopt you adopt Babylonians teachings which the Almighty in scripture sais we should flee from?
Jim

As to your last post: you seem under the missaprehension that I accept the doctrine of transubstantiation.
Like all Reformed Christians, I don't.
You should realise that by now.

Now, as to the difference between JWs and Christians, I know you like posting links instead of answering questions, so  
http://carm.org/is-the-jehovahs-witness-religion-christian

and


http://www.christchurchcentralshe...hristians-and-jehovahs-witnesses/
and
http://christianity.net.au/questi...stians_and_jehovas_witness_differ
JamesJah

Jim wrote:
As to your last post: you seem under the missaprehension that I accept the doctrine of transubstantiation.
Like all Reformed Christians, I don't.
You should realise that by now.

Now, as to the difference between JWs and Christians, I know you like posting links instead of answering questions, so

http://www.christchurchcentralshe...hristians-and-jehovahs-witnesses/
and
http://christianity.net.au/questi...stians_and_jehovas_witness_differ


Russell did not found JW's or even Russellites He started a bible study group which came to be called the bible students so he was not all knowing but a researcher of bible truths which became well supported by truth seekers and hated by the anti truth seeker the common clergy.

The principle of keeping on the watch as Jesus advised and only using scripture when teaching has been the way to clear up the false teaching and the numbing of the mind that false traditions had done for the church.

Many sleeping Christians have at last come to see that the prophets had been speaking for our day now that they are bow looking at the end time prophecies for themselves, they still has not changed the minds of the critics yet but that is their problem not ours we know what is Gods purpose even though most Christians are still asleep as to what it is.

So the Kingdom good advice that the bible teaches is still what the JW, teaches rather than church traditions.


Mathew 24O 14

John 17: 3

Dan 2: 44

You will not have Jehovah's name here in your bible

(Isaiah 2:3
many peoples will go and say: “Come, let us go up to the mountain of Jehovah,


Are you still being taught the wages of sin is Hell?
Jim

I've never been taught that "the wages of sin is hell".
No Christian I know would ever misuse scripture in that fashion, James.
We leave that to the non-Christian New World Mistranslation.
JamesJah

Jim wrote:
I've never been taught that "the wages of sin is hell".
No Christian I know would ever misuse scripture in that fashion, James.
We leave that to the non-Christian New World Mistranslation.


You forget I came out of the church of this world and know exactly what they teach in fact I was one of those teachers.

I am as much familiar with the writings of the King James bible as I am withy the New world translation.

I also saw the rise of a competing group to the JW's who put the enfaces on being born again vast suns paid to Billy Graham to stop the Haemorrhaging of the church as their falls teachings became exposed.

Most church persons still do not know what God's purpose for them is, most still think that heaven is their destination, do they not?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwBX66OuI7g
Jim

JamesJah wrote:
Jim wrote:
I've never been taught that "the wages of sin is hell".
No Christian I know would ever misuse scripture in that fashion, James.
We leave that to the non-Christian New World Mistranslation.


You forget I came out of the church of this world and know exactly what they teach in fact I was one of those teachers.
-
i have many brothers and sisters in Christ in the
rc church.
-


I am as much familiar with the writings of the King James bible as I am withy the New world translation.
-
Nice.
The KJV is a poor translation, the NWT a false translation.
There's a difference.
-
I also saw the rise of a competing group to the JW's who put the enfaces on being born again vast suns paid to Billy Graham to stop the Haemorrhaging of the church as their falls teachings became exposed.  
-
Eh?
Have you ever worked in a Billy Graham rally?
Do you know how they are funded?
I do.
I was privilaged to be part of 'mission Scotland' where I was a councillor.
I can assure you, James, that every penny was raised by individuals and those who contributed on the nightly rallies.
Every penny was independently accounted for, audited and checked. No church was asked to contribute, though many ddid.
Do you wish to dispute this?
It migt be a matter for the Scottish Legal authorities.
I'm willing to pursue it if you wish.
-


Most church persons still do not know what God's purpose for them is, most still think that heaven is their destination, do they not?
-
If you mean that my eternity is completely secure because I accept Christ, and all He has done for me, as my personal LORD, Saviour and God - yes.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwBX66OuI7g
JamesJah

If you have a good relationship with Jesus Jim why do you keep proffering that Jesus is equal with his father?
Jim

JamesJah wrote:
If you have a good relationship with Jesus Jim why do you keep proffering that Jesus is equal with his father?


-
No one is equal to Hod, James.
Since He is Triune in nature, your question is a non sequitur.
JamesJah

Jim wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
If you have a good relationship with Jesus Jim why do you keep proffering that Jesus is equal with his father?


-
No one is equal to Hod, James.
Since He is Triune in nature, your question is a non sequitur.


Triune is equal in power substance and glory, Jesus in a mirror image of his father but he is not equal in glory, at the end of his thousand year rein he hands the kingdom over to his Father, so that all honor the father as the most high and most glorious.

The big difference between Satan the present god of this world and Jesus is that Jesus does not look upon himself as equal in power substance and glory to his father as Satan does, Jesus is submissive to his Father


1 Corinthians 15:24-28
Next, the end, when he hands over the Kingdom to his God and Father, when he has brought to nothing all government and all authority and power. For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet. And the last enemy, death, is to be brought to nothing. For God “subjected all things under his feet.” But when he says that ‘all things have been subjected,’ it is evident that this does not include the One who subjected all things to him. But when all things will have been subjected to him, then the Son himself will also subject himself to the One who subjected all things to him, that God may be all things to everyone.

       nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Christian chat
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum