Solo

[Solo]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>In the book of Hebrews, it says, "For we who have believed enter that rest, just as he has said, 'As I swore in My wrath, they shall not enter My rest,' although His works were finished from the foundation of the world. For He has said somewhere concerning the seventh day: 'And God rested on the seventh day from all His works'; and again in this passage, 'They shall not enter My rest,' " Hebrews 4:3-6. So, we can see God did not rest in the sense that He was tired, but rather rested in fellowship with the world He had just created; or in the sense that believers will rest with Him for eternity. </end quote></div>

My apologies for the late reply. I have off work every Tuesday and Wedsday; every other day is mighty hectic. With that being said, I personally think it's poor taste quoting the bible. It's kinda like showing Spiderman exists by quoting Marvel comics. Quoting fiction does nothing. Mockingbird, you can sling bible quotes till your blue in the face, quoting from a book of fiction to prove that it's not fiction shows absolutely nothing; except for failure to take reality at face value. But in this case, seeing is we are talking about the God of the bible, since it is the only thing you have to show God exits, I'll deal.
But why couldn't he just think the universe into existence, or use pixie dust? What prompted God to make it, was he board? BTW, who was that speaking in Hebrews? Wasn't that Paul? How would he know anything about the creation of the universe? You can say he rested in any sense you wish; whatever helps you sleep better at night, but the fact remains that an omnipotent God had to rest.




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Lets say you're the parent of a child. Obviously, you don't want your child to make a bad decision, but does that mean you become overprotective of the child and never allow them to make a decision on their own? Sometimes a parent has to allow a child to make a bad decision because they love their child. If God created Adam and Eve but only gave them the option of serving Him, what kind of God would that be? Then God truly would be a fascist God. </end quote></div>

No, in that scenario, if you love your child, you don't allow them the option of making a bad decision. If you had a baby in a crib, would you put a four-leaved clover on one side, then a Desert Eagle handgun in the other, and expect them to choose? Now no responsible parent would ever conceive of doing such an incompetent thing; if he did would be prosecuted for negligence. God placed two humans in a garden (It's like a baby in a crib), and placed the tree of evil and life in it. (like the four leaved clover and gun). How is this any different? Actually, I think it is worse if God knew beforehand that Adam would be tempted. Then the tree just served to tempt, and his tantrum resulted in a sadistic punishment.

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>However, it is incorrect to say that God made the pleasing in order to draw Adam and Eve in.</end quote></div>

Then why did he make it?




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Adam and Eve did not need to be taught obedience because they were created in the likeness and image of God. When God told Adam not to eat of the tree, it was not like a parent telling a child to stay away from a hot stove, but rather a mutual understanding between God and Adam. However, Adam and Eve were both carried away and enticed by their own lust (not meaning sexual lust). They saw the tree was good for food, it was a delight to the eyes, and it was desirable to make one wise. They lusted after the fruit, and it gave birth to sin. Lust is simply desiring something God has created in a way that God did not intend.</end quote></div>


Actually sin is a transgression of God's will. So if you beat your kids when they curse at you, you are a sick, perverted individual, right? Well, you wouldn't be a sinner though because you are carrying out God's will. BTW, why does God have to resort to fruit to give birth to sin? The universe contains sin, God made the universe. You do the math.
If Adam and Eve were made in God's likeness, why the need for the tree of life? Surely there was no death before the fall? Adam and Eve were only mortal after they ate from the tree, so why would God put the tree that caused them to eventually die in the garden?

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>sin is simply seperation from God.</end quote></div>

How on earth can anyone manage to separate themselves from an omnipresent diety? I think in Psalms it says that God is in hell. So in conclusion, this "separation from God" jargon is simply just a smokescreen to whitewash God of any crimes.



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Now, if God is the source of life,</end quote></div>

Actually Mockingbird, the union between a female and a male is the source of life.




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>As to why Adam and Eve didn't just drop dead on the spot, "Do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. The Lord is not slow about His promises, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance." 2 Peter 3:8-9 </end quote></div>

If God's day doesn't equal a human day, then why does any other word in the bible equal the human meaning?




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I would suspect for the same reason a parent would ask a child what happened to the cookies in the cookie jar, or how the window got broken, etc. We see God doing the same thing with Cain: "Then the Lord said to Cain, 'Where is your brother?' and he said, "Am I my brother's keeper?' He said, "What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood is crying up to Me from the ground." Genesis 4:9-10. </end quote></div>

I can certainly see why a parent would do this, but there's a slight difference- the parent is not omniscient; the parent doesn't know with 100% certainty what the child did. If God knew that Adam ate from the tree, and knew exactly how Adam would answer, wasn't it kinda pointless to ask? Why the exercise in futility?



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>It is true that the serpent could only have been in the garden if God allowed him to be there. Furthermore, God would have known full well of what the serpent was doing. So why did God allow it? God could have been overprotective and overbearing, I suppose, but once again, that would make Him a bit of a fascist. </end quote></div>

Mockingbird, you agree the serpent was in the garden, right? It also knew of evil, right? Where do you think it received this knowledge, it didn't eat from the tree? It makes sense that God had gave the serpent the knowledge of evil prior and then sent him in his garden.


<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>In many parts of the Bible, it seems like God punishes the children for the sins of the parents. However, as it says, "Through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned." Romans 5:12. It does not say death spread to all men because through one man sin entered the world, but rather, death spread to all men because all sinned. We are each responsible for our own sin and no one else's. There has only been one man who took the sin of others upon Himself, and that is *****.

In Him we have the choice of Adam once again. Do we take from the Tree of Life, that is to say, *****, or do we continue to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil?</end quote></div>

Well that brings us back to the original point. God would not give us Free will if we choose evil.(That's totally assuming he loves humans) If you knew your child was gonna get ran over by a big rig, would you give him the option of playing in the street? Why couldn't God create us with the knowledge instilled of the consequences of the actions that do us harm, don't you think it could have saved a lot of pain? If God created the ability to choose evil, then why are humans blamed for making bad decisions? We do not have the ability not NOT to sin. So basically, we are being blamed for something in which we cannot help but doing. God is responsible for all the inadequacies he created in us. If there is a problem with your watch, you don't blame yourself do you? No it's the watchmaker's fault for making a defective product. If God created everything, tell me how he is not implicated either directly or indirectly concerning everything that goes down? Sheesh, Christianity makes a huge mess out of life, and disguises itself as the remedy for it.

 

[Solo]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>In the book of Hebrews, it says, "For we who have believed enter that rest, just as he has said, 'As I swore in My wrath, they shall not enter My rest,' although His works were finished from the foundation of the world. For He has said somewhere concerning the seventh day: 'And God rested on the seventh day from all His works'; and again in this passage, 'They shall not enter My rest,' " Hebrews 4:3-6. So, we can see God did not rest in the sense that He was tired, but rather rested in fellowship with the world He had just created; or in the sense that believers will rest with Him for eternity. </end quote></div>

My apologies for the late reply. I have off work every Tuesday and Wedsday; every other day is mighty hectic. With that being said, I personally think it's poor taste quoting the bible. It's kinda like showing Spiderman exists by quoting Marvel comics. Quoting fiction does nothing. Mockingbird, you can sling bible quotes till your blue in the face, quoting from a book of fiction to prove that it's not fiction shows absolutely nothing; except for failure to take reality at face value. But in this case, seeing is we are talking about the God of the bible, since it is the only thing you have to show God exits, I'll deal.
But why couldn't he just think the universe into existence, or use pixie dust? What prompted God to make it, was he board? BTW, who was that speaking in Hebrews? Wasn't that Paul? How would he know anything about the creation of the universe? You can say he rested in any sense you wish; whatever helps you sleep better at night, but the fact remains that an omnipotent God had to rest.




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Lets say you're the parent of a child. Obviously, you don't want your child to make a bad decision, but does that mean you become overprotective of the child and never allow them to make a decision on their own? Sometimes a parent has to allow a child to make a bad decision because they love their child. If God created Adam and Eve but only gave them the option of serving Him, what kind of God would that be? Then God truly would be a fascist God. </end quote></div>

No, in that scenario, if you love your child, you don't allow them the option of making a bad decision. If you had a baby in a crib, would you put a four-leaved clover on one side, then a Desert Eagle handgun in the other, and expect them to choose? Now no responsible parent would ever conceive of doing such an incompetent thing; if he did would be prosecuted for negligence. God placed two humans in a garden (It's like a baby in a crib), and placed the tree of evil and life in it. (like the four leaved clover and gun). How is this any different? Actually, I think it is worse if God knew beforehand that Adam would be tempted. Then the tree just served to tempt, and his tantrum resulted in a sadistic punishment.

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>However, it is incorrect to say that God made the pleasing in order to draw Adam and Eve in.</end quote></div>

Then why did he make it?




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Adam and Eve did not need to be taught obedience because they were created in the likeness and image of God. When God told Adam not to eat of the tree, it was not like a parent telling a child to stay away from a hot stove, but rather a mutual understanding between God and Adam. However, Adam and Eve were both carried away and enticed by their own lust (not meaning sexual lust). They saw the tree was good for food, it was a delight to the eyes, and it was desirable to make one wise. They lusted after the fruit, and it gave birth to sin. Lust is simply desiring something God has created in a way that God did not intend.</end quote></div>


Actually sin is a transgression of God's will. So if you beat your kids when they curse at you, you are a sick, perverted individual, right? Well, you wouldn't be a sinner though because you are carrying out God's will. BTW, why does God have to resort to fruit to give birth to sin? The universe contains sin, God made the universe. You do the math.
If Adam and Eve were made in God's likeness, why the need for the tree of life? Surely there was no death before the fall? Adam and Eve were only mortal after they ate from the tree, so why would God put the tree that caused them to eventually die in the garden?

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>sin is simply seperation from God.</end quote></div>

How on earth can anyone manage to separate themselves from an omnipresent diety? I think in Psalms it says that God is in hell. So in conclusion, this "separation from God" jargon is simply just a smokescreen to whitewash God of any crimes.



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Now, if God is the source of life,</end quote></div>

Actually Mockingbird, the union between a female and a male is the source of life.




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>As to why Adam and Eve didn't just drop dead on the spot, "Do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. The Lord is not slow about His promises, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance." 2 Peter 3:8-9 </end quote></div>

If God's day doesn't equal a human day, then why does any other word in the bible equal the human meaning?




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I would suspect for the same reason a parent would ask a child what happened to the cookies in the cookie jar, or how the window got broken, etc. We see God doing the same thing with Cain: "Then the Lord said to Cain, 'Where is your brother?' and he said, "Am I my brother's keeper?' He said, "What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood is crying up to Me from the ground." Genesis 4:9-10. </end quote></div>

I can certainly see why a parent would do this, but there's a slight difference- the parent is not omniscient; the parent doesn't know with 100% certainty what the child did. If God knew that Adam ate from the tree, and knew exactly how Adam would answer, wasn't it kinda pointless to ask? Why the exercise in futility?



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>It is true that the serpent could only have been in the garden if God allowed him to be there. Furthermore, God would have known full well of what the serpent was doing. So why did God allow it? God could have been overprotective and overbearing, I suppose, but once again, that would make Him a bit of a fascist. </end quote></div>

Mockingbird, you agree the serpent was in the garden, right? It also knew of evil, right? Where do you think it received this knowledge, it didn't eat from the tree? It makes sense that God had gave the serpent the knowledge of evil prior and then sent him in his garden.


<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>In many parts of the Bible, it seems like God punishes the children for the sins of the parents. However, as it says, "Through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned." Romans 5:12. It does not say death spread to all men because through one man sin entered the world, but rather, death spread to all men because all sinned. We are each responsible for our own sin and no one else's. There has only been one man who took the sin of others upon Himself, and that is *****.

In Him we have the choice of Adam once again. Do we take from the Tree of Life, that is to say, *****, or do we continue to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil?</end quote></div>

Well that brings us back to the original point. God would not give us Free will if we choose evil.(That's totally assuming he loves humans) If you knew your child was gonna get ran over by a big rig, would you give him the option of playing in the street? Why couldn't God create us with the knowledge instilled of the consequences of the actions that do us harm, don't you think it could have saved a lot of pain? If God created the ability to choose evil, then why are humans blamed for making bad decisions? We do not have the ability not NOT to sin. So basically, we are being blamed for something in which we cannot help but doing. God is responsible for all the inadequacies he created in us. If there is a problem with your watch, you don't blame yourself do you? No it's the watchmaker's fault for making a defective product. If God created everything, tell me how he is not implicated either directly or indirectly concerning everything that goes down? Sheesh, Christianity makes a huge mess out of life, and disguises itself as the remedy for it.

 

[Solo]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>In the book of Hebrews, it says, "For we who have believed enter that rest, just as he has said, 'As I swore in My wrath, they shall not enter My rest,' although His works were finished from the foundation of the world. For He has said somewhere concerning the seventh day: 'And God rested on the seventh day from all His works'; and again in this passage, 'They shall not enter My rest,' " Hebrews 4:3-6. So, we can see God did not rest in the sense that He was tired, but rather rested in fellowship with the world He had just created; or in the sense that believers will rest with Him for eternity. </end quote></div>

My apologies for the late reply. I have off work every Tuesday and Wedsday; every other day is mighty hectic. With that being said, I personally think it's poor taste quoting the bible. It's kinda like showing Spiderman exists by quoting Marvel comics. Quoting fiction does nothing. Mockingbird, you can sling bible quotes till your blue in the face, quoting from a book of fiction to prove that it's not fiction shows absolutely nothing; except for failure to take reality at face value. But in this case, seeing is we are talking about the God of the bible, since it is the only thing you have to show God exits, I'll deal.
But why couldn't he just think the universe into existence, or use pixie dust? What prompted God to make it, was he board? BTW, who was that speaking in Hebrews? Wasn't that Paul? How would he know anything about the creation of the universe? You can say he rested in any sense you wish; whatever helps you sleep better at night, but the fact remains that an omnipotent God had to rest.




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Lets say you're the parent of a child. Obviously, you don't want your child to make a bad decision, but does that mean you become overprotective of the child and never allow them to make a decision on their own? Sometimes a parent has to allow a child to make a bad decision because they love their child. If God created Adam and Eve but only gave them the option of serving Him, what kind of God would that be? Then God truly would be a fascist God. </end quote></div>

No, in that scenario, if you love your child, you don't allow them the option of making a bad decision. If you had a baby in a crib, would you put a four-leaved clover on one side, then a Desert Eagle handgun in the other, and expect them to choose? Now no responsible parent would ever conceive of doing such an incompetent thing; if he did would be prosecuted for negligence. God placed two humans in a garden (It's like a baby in a crib), and placed the tree of evil and life in it. (like the four leaved clover and gun). How is this any different? Actually, I think it is worse if God knew beforehand that Adam would be tempted. Then the tree just served to tempt, and his tantrum resulted in a sadistic punishment.

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>However, it is incorrect to say that God made the pleasing in order to draw Adam and Eve in.</end quote></div>

Then why did he make it?




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Adam and Eve did not need to be taught obedience because they were created in the likeness and image of God. When God told Adam not to eat of the tree, it was not like a parent telling a child to stay away from a hot stove, but rather a mutual understanding between God and Adam. However, Adam and Eve were both carried away and enticed by their own lust (not meaning sexual lust). They saw the tree was good for food, it was a delight to the eyes, and it was desirable to make one wise. They lusted after the fruit, and it gave birth to sin. Lust is simply desiring something God has created in a way that God did not intend.</end quote></div>


Actually sin is a transgression of God's will. So if you beat your kids when they curse at you, you are a sick, perverted individual, right? Well, you wouldn't be a sinner though because you are carrying out God's will. BTW, why does God have to resort to fruit to give birth to sin? The universe contains sin, God made the universe. You do the math.
If Adam and Eve were made in God's likeness, why the need for the tree of life? Surely there was no death before the fall? Adam and Eve were only mortal after they ate from the tree, so why would God put the tree that caused them to eventually die in the garden?

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>sin is simply seperation from God.</end quote></div>

How on earth can anyone manage to separate themselves from an omnipresent diety? I think in Psalms it says that God is in hell. So in conclusion, this "separation from God" jargon is simply just a smokescreen to whitewash God of any crimes.



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Now, if God is the source of life,</end quote></div>

Actually Mockingbird, the union between a female and a male is the source of life.




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>As to why Adam and Eve didn't just drop dead on the spot, "Do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. The Lord is not slow about His promises, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance." 2 Peter 3:8-9 </end quote></div>

If God's day doesn't equal a human day, then why does any other word in the bible equal the human meaning?




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I would suspect for the same reason a parent would ask a child what happened to the cookies in the cookie jar, or how the window got broken, etc. We see God doing the same thing with Cain: "Then the Lord said to Cain, 'Where is your brother?' and he said, "Am I my brother's keeper?' He said, "What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood is crying up to Me from the ground." Genesis 4:9-10. </end quote></div>

I can certainly see why a parent would do this, but there's a slight difference- the parent is not omniscient; the parent doesn't know with 100% certainty what the child did. If God knew that Adam ate from the tree, and knew exactly how Adam would answer, wasn't it kinda pointless to ask? Why the exercise in futility?



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>It is true that the serpent could only have been in the garden if God allowed him to be there. Furthermore, God would have known full well of what the serpent was doing. So why did God allow it? God could have been overprotective and overbearing, I suppose, but once again, that would make Him a bit of a fascist. </end quote></div>

Mockingbird, you agree the serpent was in the garden, right? It also knew of evil, right? Where do you think it received this knowledge, it didn't eat from the tree? It makes sense that God had gave the serpent the knowledge of evil prior and then sent him in his garden.


<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>In many parts of the Bible, it seems like God punishes the children for the sins of the parents. However, as it says, "Through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned." Romans 5:12. It does not say death spread to all men because through one man sin entered the world, but rather, death spread to all men because all sinned. We are each responsible for our own sin and no one else's. There has only been one man who took the sin of others upon Himself, and that is *****.

In Him we have the choice of Adam once again. Do we take from the Tree of Life, that is to say, *****, or do we continue to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil?</end quote></div>

Well that brings us back to the original point. God would not give us Free will if we choose evil.(That's totally assuming he loves humans) If you knew your child was gonna get ran over by a big rig, would you give him the option of playing in the street? Why couldn't God create us with the knowledge instilled of the consequences of the actions that do us harm, don't you think it could have saved a lot of pain? If God created the ability to choose evil, then why are humans blamed for making bad decisions? We do not have the ability not NOT to sin. So basically, we are being blamed for something in which we cannot help but doing. God is responsible for all the inadequacies he created in us. If there is a problem with your watch, you don't blame yourself do you? No it's the watchmaker's fault for making a defective product. If God created everything, tell me how he is not implicated either directly or indirectly concerning everything that goes down? Sheesh, Christianity makes a huge mess out of life, and disguises itself as the remedy for it.

 

[Solo]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>In the book of Hebrews, it says, "For we who have believed enter that rest, just as he has said, 'As I swore in My wrath, they shall not enter My rest,' although His works were finished from the foundation of the world. For He has said somewhere concerning the seventh day: 'And God rested on the seventh day from all His works'; and again in this passage, 'They shall not enter My rest,' " Hebrews 4:3-6. So, we can see God did not rest in the sense that He was tired, but rather rested in fellowship with the world He had just created; or in the sense that believers will rest with Him for eternity. </end quote>

My apologies for the late reply. I have off work every Tuesday and Wedsday; every other day is mighty hectic. With that being said, I personally think it's poor taste quoting the bible. It's kinda like showing Spiderman exists by quoting Marvel comics. Quoting fiction does nothing. Mockingbird, you can sling bible quotes till your blue in the face, quoting from a book of fiction to prove that it's not fiction shows absolutely nothing; except for failure to take reality at face value. But in this case, seeing is we are talking about the God of the bible, since it is the only thing you have to show God exits, I'll deal.
But why couldn't he just think the universe into existence, or use pixie dust? What prompted God to make it, was he board? BTW, who was that speaking in Hebrews? Wasn't that Paul? How would he know anything about the creation of the universe? You can say he rested in any sense you wish; whatever helps you sleep better at night, but the fact remains that an omnipotent God had to rest.




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Lets say you're the parent of a child. Obviously, you don't want your child to make a bad decision, but does that mean you become overprotective of the child and never allow them to make a decision on their own? Sometimes a parent has to allow a child to make a bad decision because they love their child. If God created Adam and Eve but only gave them the option of serving Him, what kind of God would that be? Then God truly would be a fascist God. </end quote>

No, in that scenario, if you love your child, you don't allow them the option of making a bad decision. If you had a baby in a crib, would you put a four-leaved clover on one side, then a Desert Eagle handgun in the other, and expect them to choose? Now no responsible parent would ever conceive of doing such an incompetent thing; if he did would be prosecuted for negligence. God placed two humans in a garden (It's like a baby in a crib), and placed the tree of evil and life in it. (like the four leaved clover and gun). How is this any different? Actually, I think it is worse if God knew beforehand that Adam would be tempted. Then the tree just served to tempt, and his tantrum resulted in a sadistic punishment.

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>However, it is incorrect to say that God made the pleasing in order to draw Adam and Eve in.</end quote>

Then why did he make it?




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Adam and Eve did not need to be taught obedience because they were created in the likeness and image of God. When God told Adam not to eat of the tree, it was not like a parent telling a child to stay away from a hot stove, but rather a mutual understanding between God and Adam. However, Adam and Eve were both carried away and enticed by their own lust (not meaning sexual lust). They saw the tree was good for food, it was a delight to the eyes, and it was desirable to make one wise. They lusted after the fruit, and it gave birth to sin. Lust is simply desiring something God has created in a way that God did not intend.</end quote>


Actually sin is a transgression of God's will. So if you beat your kids when they curse at you, you are a sick, perverted individual, right? Well, you wouldn't be a sinner though because you are carrying out God's will. BTW, why does God have to resort to fruit to give birth to sin? The universe contains sin, God made the universe. You do the math.
If Adam and Eve were made in God's likeness, why the need for the tree of life? Surely there was no death before the fall? Adam and Eve were only mortal after they ate from the tree, so why would God put the tree that caused them to eventually die in the garden?

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>sin is simply seperation from God.</end quote>

How on earth can anyone manage to separate themselves from an omnipresent diety? I think in Psalms it says that God is in hell. So in conclusion, this "separation from God" jargon is simply just a smokescreen to whitewash God of any crimes.



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Now, if God is the source of life,</end quote>

Actually Mockingbird, the union between a female and a male is the source of life.




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>As to why Adam and Eve didn't just drop dead on the spot, "Do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. The Lord is not slow about His promises, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance." 2 Peter 3:8-9 </end quote>

If God's day doesn't equal a human day, then why does any other word in the bible equal the human meaning?




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I would suspect for the same reason a parent would ask a child what happened to the cookies in the cookie jar, or how the window got broken, etc. We see God doing the same thing with Cain: "Then the Lord said to Cain, 'Where is your brother?' and he said, "Am I my brother's keeper?' He said, "What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood is crying up to Me from the ground." Genesis 4:9-10. </end quote>

I can certainly see why a parent would do this, but there's a slight difference- the parent is not omniscient; the parent doesn't know with 100% certainty what the child did. If God knew that Adam ate from the tree, and knew exactly how Adam would answer, wasn't it kinda pointless to ask? Why the exercise in futility?



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>It is true that the serpent could only have been in the garden if God allowed him to be there. Furthermore, God would have known full well of what the serpent was doing. So why did God allow it? God could have been overprotective and overbearing, I suppose, but once again, that would make Him a bit of a fascist. </end quote>

Mockingbird, you agree the serpent was in the garden, right? It also knew of evil, right? Where do you think it received this knowledge, it didn't eat from the tree? It makes sense that God had gave the serpent the knowledge of evil prior and then sent him in his garden.


<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>In many parts of the Bible, it seems like God punishes the children for the sins of the parents. However, as it says, "Through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned." Romans 5:12. It does not say death spread to all men because through one man sin entered the world, but rather, death spread to all men because all sinned. We are each responsible for our own sin and no one else's. There has only been one man who took the sin of others upon Himself, and that is *****.

In Him we have the choice of Adam once again. Do we take from the Tree of Life, that is to say, *****, or do we continue to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil?</end quote>

Well that brings us back to the original point. God would not give us Free will if we choose evil.(That's totally assuming he loves humans) If you knew your child was gonna get ran over by a big rig, would you give him the option of playing in the street? Why couldn't God create us with the knowledge instilled of the consequences of the actions that do us harm, don't you think it could have saved a lot of pain? If God created the ability to choose evil, then why are humans blamed for making bad decisions? We do not have the ability not NOT to sin. So basically, we are being blamed for something in which we cannot help but doing. God is responsible for all the inadequacies he created in us. If there is a problem with your watch, you don't blame yourself do you? No it's the watchmaker's fault for making a defective product. If God created everything, tell me how he is not implicated either directly or indirectly concerning everything that goes down? Sheesh, Christianity makes a huge mess out of life, and disguises itself as the remedy for it.

 

[Solo]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>In the book of Hebrews, it says, "For we who have believed enter that rest, just as he has said, 'As I swore in My wrath, they shall not enter My rest,' although His works were finished from the foundation of the world. For He has said somewhere concerning the seventh day: 'And God rested on the seventh day from all His works'; and again in this passage, 'They shall not enter My rest,' " Hebrews 4:3-6. So, we can see God did not rest in the sense that He was tired, but rather rested in fellowship with the world He had just created; or in the sense that believers will rest with Him for eternity. </end quote>

My apologies for the late reply. I have off work every Tuesday and Wedsday; every other day is mighty hectic. With that being said, I personally think it's poor taste quoting the bible. It's kinda like showing Spiderman exists by quoting Marvel comics. Quoting fiction does nothing. Mockingbird, you can sling bible quotes till your blue in the face, quoting from a book of fiction to prove that it's not fiction shows absolutely nothing; except for failure to take reality at face value. But in this case, seeing is we are talking about the God of the bible, since it is the only thing you have to show God exits, I'll deal.
But why couldn't he just think the universe into existence, or use pixie dust? What prompted God to make it, was he board? BTW, who was that speaking in Hebrews? Wasn't that Paul? How would he know anything about the creation of the universe? You can say he rested in any sense you wish; whatever helps you sleep better at night, but the fact remains that an omnipotent God had to rest.




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Lets say you're the parent of a child. Obviously, you don't want your child to make a bad decision, but does that mean you become overprotective of the child and never allow them to make a decision on their own? Sometimes a parent has to allow a child to make a bad decision because they love their child. If God created Adam and Eve but only gave them the option of serving Him, what kind of God would that be? Then God truly would be a fascist God. </end quote>

No, in that scenario, if you love your child, you don't allow them the option of making a bad decision. If you had a baby in a crib, would you put a four-leaved clover on one side, then a Desert Eagle handgun in the other, and expect them to choose? Now no responsible parent would ever conceive of doing such an incompetent thing; if he did would be prosecuted for negligence. God placed two humans in a garden (It's like a baby in a crib), and placed the tree of evil and life in it. (like the four leaved clover and gun). How is this any different? Actually, I think it is worse if God knew beforehand that Adam would be tempted. Then the tree just served to tempt, and his tantrum resulted in a sadistic punishment.

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>However, it is incorrect to say that God made the pleasing in order to draw Adam and Eve in.</end quote>

Then why did he make it?




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Adam and Eve did not need to be taught obedience because they were created in the likeness and image of God. When God told Adam not to eat of the tree, it was not like a parent telling a child to stay away from a hot stove, but rather a mutual understanding between God and Adam. However, Adam and Eve were both carried away and enticed by their own lust (not meaning sexual lust). They saw the tree was good for food, it was a delight to the eyes, and it was desirable to make one wise. They lusted after the fruit, and it gave birth to sin. Lust is simply desiring something God has created in a way that God did not intend.</end quote>


Actually sin is a transgression of God's will. So if you beat your kids when they curse at you, you are a sick, perverted individual, right? Well, you wouldn't be a sinner though because you are carrying out God's will. BTW, why does God have to resort to fruit to give birth to sin? The universe contains sin, God made the universe. You do the math.
If Adam and Eve were made in God's likeness, why the need for the tree of life? Surely there was no death before the fall? Adam and Eve were only mortal after they ate from the tree, so why would God put the tree that caused them to eventually die in the garden?

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>sin is simply seperation from God.</end quote>

How on earth can anyone manage to separate themselves from an omnipresent diety? I think in Psalms it says that God is in hell. So in conclusion, this "separation from God" jargon is simply just a smokescreen to whitewash God of any crimes.



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Now, if God is the source of life,</end quote>

Actually Mockingbird, the union between a female and a male is the source of life.




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>As to why Adam and Eve didn't just drop dead on the spot, "Do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. The Lord is not slow about His promises, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance." 2 Peter 3:8-9 </end quote>

If God's day doesn't equal a human day, then why does any other word in the bible equal the human meaning?




<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I would suspect for the same reason a parent would ask a child what happened to the cookies in the cookie jar, or how the window got broken, etc. We see God doing the same thing with Cain: "Then the Lord said to Cain, 'Where is your brother?' and he said, "Am I my brother's keeper?' He said, "What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood is crying up to Me from the ground." Genesis 4:9-10. </end quote>

I can certainly see why a parent would do this, but there's a slight difference- the parent is not omniscient; the parent doesn't know with 100% certainty what the child did. If God knew that Adam ate from the tree, and knew exactly how Adam would answer, wasn't it kinda pointless to ask? Why the exercise in futility?



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>It is true that the serpent could only have been in the garden if God allowed him to be there. Furthermore, God would have known full well of what the serpent was doing. So why did God allow it? God could have been overprotective and overbearing, I suppose, but once again, that would make Him a bit of a fascist. </end quote>

Mockingbird, you agree the serpent was in the garden, right? It also knew of evil, right? Where do you think it received this knowledge, it didn't eat from the tree? It makes sense that God had gave the serpent the knowledge of evil prior and then sent him in his garden.


<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>In many parts of the Bible, it seems like God punishes the children for the sins of the parents. However, as it says, "Through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned." Romans 5:12. It does not say death spread to all men because through one man sin entered the world, but rather, death spread to all men because all sinned. We are each responsible for our own sin and no one else's. There has only been one man who took the sin of others upon Himself, and that is *****.

In Him we have the choice of Adam once again. Do we take from the Tree of Life, that is to say, *****, or do we continue to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil?</end quote>

Well that brings us back to the original point. God would not give us Free will if we choose evil.(That's totally assuming he loves humans) If you knew your child was gonna get ran over by a big rig, would you give him the option of playing in the street? Why couldn't God create us with the knowledge instilled of the consequences of the actions that do us harm, don't you think it could have saved a lot of pain? If God created the ability to choose evil, then why are humans blamed for making bad decisions? We do not have the ability not NOT to sin. So basically, we are being blamed for something in which we cannot help but doing. God is responsible for all the inadequacies he created in us. If there is a problem with your watch, you don't blame yourself do you? No it's the watchmaker's fault for making a defective product. If God created everything, tell me how he is not implicated either directly or indirectly concerning everything that goes down? Sheesh, Christianity makes a huge mess out of life, and disguises itself as the remedy for it.

 

[Mockingbird]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I personally think it's poor taste quoting the bible</end quote></div>

I thought we were talking about the doctrine of Christianity.

<i>What does Paul know about the creation of the universe?</i>

In 2 Peter 1:21-21 it says, "Know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

Further, Paul writes, "For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words." 1 Corinthians 2:10-11.

Therefore, the writer of Hebrews was able to write about the creation of the universe, because he had within himself the Spirit of God.

Do not assume, however, that I or any other Christian am relying on the word of Paul, or any other man who wrote the Bible. For in 1 John 5:6-8, it says, "This is the One who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and the blood. It is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."

Now, the water is the Word of God and the blood is the works of God (see John 5:36-40). It is the Spirit who testifies of the water and the blood, so that we may know what comes from God and what does not. And we know that the Holy Spirit is available to all who believe.

Therefore, it is the very Spirit within me that testifies the Bible is true. Furthermore, it is the Spirit within me who testifies of the interpretation of the Bible. For, "When He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak of His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come." John 16:13

<i> Why did an omnipotent God have to rest?</i>

It doesn't say anywhere God <i>had</i> to rest. God rested because He wanted to. God had just created the world, and He wanted to sit back and enjoy it for a while.

<i>How can anyone separate themselves from an omnipresent deity?</i>

Suppose you have a child who wants nothing to do with you. You can be physically present as much as you wish, but the child is still going to separate himself from you mentally, emotionally, and socially. Now, unlike a human parent, God has the ability to force His way in and control the child like a robot, but instead He gives us the freedom to make our own choices.

<i>If God's day doesn't equal a human day, then why does any other word in the bible equal the human meaning?</i>

The verse in 2 Peter is speaking about time, not the meaning of words.

<i> Where did the serpent receive the knowledge of good and evil?</i>

First, nowhere does it say the tree of knowledge of good and evil was the only source of sin. God did not create lust for the fruit in Adam and Eve's heart, but rather they created their own lust. In the same way, the serpent was enticed by his own lust and it gave birth to sin, that is to say, evil.

<i>If God created everything, tell me how he is not implicated either directly or indirectly concerning everything that goes down?</i>

There was once a week-long summer camp where all the children were given disposable cameras for the use of taking pictures. Instead of taking pictures, however, many children disassembled the cameras and used the flash batteries as sort of a mini-stun gun. Now, I wouldn't blame the manufacturer of the disposable camera for this. I wouldn't even blame the person who provided the cameras. I would hold the children responsible for their own actions.



As for the rest of your questions and criticism, I don't really know how to answer them besides what I've already said.

 

[Mockingbird]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I personally think it's poor taste quoting the bible</end quote></div>

I thought we were talking about the doctrine of Christianity.

<i>What does Paul know about the creation of the universe?</i>

In 2 Peter 1:21-21 it says, "Know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

Further, Paul writes, "For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words." 1 Corinthians 2:10-11.

Therefore, the writer of Hebrews was able to write about the creation of the universe, because he had within himself the Spirit of God.

Do not assume, however, that I or any other Christian am relying on the word of Paul, or any other man who wrote the Bible. For in 1 John 5:6-8, it says, "This is the One who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and the blood. It is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."

Now, the water is the Word of God and the blood is the works of God (see John 5:36-40). It is the Spirit who testifies of the water and the blood, so that we may know what comes from God and what does not. And we know that the Holy Spirit is available to all who believe.

Therefore, it is the very Spirit within me that testifies the Bible is true. Furthermore, it is the Spirit within me who testifies of the interpretation of the Bible. For, "When He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak of His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come." John 16:13

<i> Why did an omnipotent God have to rest?</i>

It doesn't say anywhere God <i>had</i> to rest. God rested because He wanted to. God had just created the world, and He wanted to sit back and enjoy it for a while.

<i>How can anyone separate themselves from an omnipresent deity?</i>

Suppose you have a child who wants nothing to do with you. You can be physically present as much as you wish, but the child is still going to separate himself from you mentally, emotionally, and socially. Now, unlike a human parent, God has the ability to force His way in and control the child like a robot, but instead He gives us the freedom to make our own choices.

<i>If God's day doesn't equal a human day, then why does any other word in the bible equal the human meaning?</i>

The verse in 2 Peter is speaking about time, not the meaning of words.

<i> Where did the serpent receive the knowledge of good and evil?</i>

First, nowhere does it say the tree of knowledge of good and evil was the only source of sin. God did not create lust for the fruit in Adam and Eve's heart, but rather they created their own lust. In the same way, the serpent was enticed by his own lust and it gave birth to sin, that is to say, evil.

<i>If God created everything, tell me how he is not implicated either directly or indirectly concerning everything that goes down?</i>

There was once a week-long summer camp where all the children were given disposable cameras for the use of taking pictures. Instead of taking pictures, however, many children disassembled the cameras and used the flash batteries as sort of a mini-stun gun. Now, I wouldn't blame the manufacturer of the disposable camera for this. I wouldn't even blame the person who provided the cameras. I would hold the children responsible for their own actions.



As for the rest of your questions and criticism, I don't really know how to answer them besides what I've already said.

 

[Mockingbird]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I personally think it's poor taste quoting the bible</end quote></div>

I thought we were talking about the doctrine of Christianity.

<i>What does Paul know about the creation of the universe?</i>

In 2 Peter 1:21-21 it says, "Know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

Further, Paul writes, "For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words." 1 Corinthians 2:10-11.

Therefore, the writer of Hebrews was able to write about the creation of the universe, because he had within himself the Spirit of God.

Do not assume, however, that I or any other Christian am relying on the word of Paul, or any other man who wrote the Bible. For in 1 John 5:6-8, it says, "This is the One who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and the blood. It is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."

Now, the water is the Word of God and the blood is the works of God (see John 5:36-40). It is the Spirit who testifies of the water and the blood, so that we may know what comes from God and what does not. And we know that the Holy Spirit is available to all who believe.

Therefore, it is the very Spirit within me that testifies the Bible is true. Furthermore, it is the Spirit within me who testifies of the interpretation of the Bible. For, "When He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak of His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come." John 16:13

<i> Why did an omnipotent God have to rest?</i>

It doesn't say anywhere God <i>had</i> to rest. God rested because He wanted to. God had just created the world, and He wanted to sit back and enjoy it for a while.

<i>How can anyone separate themselves from an omnipresent deity?</i>

Suppose you have a child who wants nothing to do with you. You can be physically present as much as you wish, but the child is still going to separate himself from you mentally, emotionally, and socially. Now, unlike a human parent, God has the ability to force His way in and control the child like a robot, but instead He gives us the freedom to make our own choices.

<i>If God's day doesn't equal a human day, then why does any other word in the bible equal the human meaning?</i>

The verse in 2 Peter is speaking about time, not the meaning of words.

<i> Where did the serpent receive the knowledge of good and evil?</i>

First, nowhere does it say the tree of knowledge of good and evil was the only source of sin. God did not create lust for the fruit in Adam and Eve's heart, but rather they created their own lust. In the same way, the serpent was enticed by his own lust and it gave birth to sin, that is to say, evil.

<i>If God created everything, tell me how he is not implicated either directly or indirectly concerning everything that goes down?</i>

There was once a week-long summer camp where all the children were given disposable cameras for the use of taking pictures. Instead of taking pictures, however, many children disassembled the cameras and used the flash batteries as sort of a mini-stun gun. Now, I wouldn't blame the manufacturer of the disposable camera for this. I wouldn't even blame the person who provided the cameras. I would hold the children responsible for their own actions.



As for the rest of your questions and criticism, I don't really know how to answer them besides what I've already said.

 

[Mockingbird]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I personally think it's poor taste quoting the bible</end quote>

I thought we were talking about the doctrine of Christianity.

<i>What does Paul know about the creation of the universe?</i>

In 2 Peter 1:21-21 it says, "Know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

Further, Paul writes, "For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words." 1 Corinthians 2:10-11.

Therefore, the writer of Hebrews was able to write about the creation of the universe, because he had within himself the Spirit of God.

Do not assume, however, that I or any other Christian am relying on the word of Paul, or any other man who wrote the Bible. For in 1 John 5:6-8, it says, "This is the One who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and the blood. It is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."

Now, the water is the Word of God and the blood is the works of God (see John 5:36-40). It is the Spirit who testifies of the water and the blood, so that we may know what comes from God and what does not. And we know that the Holy Spirit is available to all who believe.

Therefore, it is the very Spirit within me that testifies the Bible is true. Furthermore, it is the Spirit within me who testifies of the interpretation of the Bible. For, "When He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak of His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come." John 16:13

<i> Why did an omnipotent God have to rest?</i>

It doesn't say anywhere God <i>had</i> to rest. God rested because He wanted to. God had just created the world, and He wanted to sit back and enjoy it for a while.

<i>How can anyone separate themselves from an omnipresent deity?</i>

Suppose you have a child who wants nothing to do with you. You can be physically present as much as you wish, but the child is still going to separate himself from you mentally, emotionally, and socially. Now, unlike a human parent, God has the ability to force His way in and control the child like a robot, but instead He gives us the freedom to make our own choices.

<i>If God's day doesn't equal a human day, then why does any other word in the bible equal the human meaning?</i>

The verse in 2 Peter is speaking about time, not the meaning of words.

<i> Where did the serpent receive the knowledge of good and evil?</i>

First, nowhere does it say the tree of knowledge of good and evil was the only source of sin. God did not create lust for the fruit in Adam and Eve's heart, but rather they created their own lust. In the same way, the serpent was enticed by his own lust and it gave birth to sin, that is to say, evil.

<i>If God created everything, tell me how he is not implicated either directly or indirectly concerning everything that goes down?</i>

There was once a week-long summer camp where all the children were given disposable cameras for the use of taking pictures. Instead of taking pictures, however, many children disassembled the cameras and used the flash batteries as sort of a mini-stun gun. Now, I wouldn't blame the manufacturer of the disposable camera for this. I wouldn't even blame the person who provided the cameras. I would hold the children responsible for their own actions.



As for the rest of your questions and criticism, I don't really know how to answer them besides what I've already said.

 

[Mockingbird]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I personally think it's poor taste quoting the bible</end quote>

I thought we were talking about the doctrine of Christianity.

<i>What does Paul know about the creation of the universe?</i>

In 2 Peter 1:21-21 it says, "Know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

Further, Paul writes, "For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words." 1 Corinthians 2:10-11.

Therefore, the writer of Hebrews was able to write about the creation of the universe, because he had within himself the Spirit of God.

Do not assume, however, that I or any other Christian am relying on the word of Paul, or any other man who wrote the Bible. For in 1 John 5:6-8, it says, "This is the One who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and the blood. It is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."

Now, the water is the Word of God and the blood is the works of God (see John 5:36-40). It is the Spirit who testifies of the water and the blood, so that we may know what comes from God and what does not. And we know that the Holy Spirit is available to all who believe.

Therefore, it is the very Spirit within me that testifies the Bible is true. Furthermore, it is the Spirit within me who testifies of the interpretation of the Bible. For, "When He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak of His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come." John 16:13

<i> Why did an omnipotent God have to rest?</i>

It doesn't say anywhere God <i>had</i> to rest. God rested because He wanted to. God had just created the world, and He wanted to sit back and enjoy it for a while.

<i>How can anyone separate themselves from an omnipresent deity?</i>

Suppose you have a child who wants nothing to do with you. You can be physically present as much as you wish, but the child is still going to separate himself from you mentally, emotionally, and socially. Now, unlike a human parent, God has the ability to force His way in and control the child like a robot, but instead He gives us the freedom to make our own choices.

<i>If God's day doesn't equal a human day, then why does any other word in the bible equal the human meaning?</i>

The verse in 2 Peter is speaking about time, not the meaning of words.

<i> Where did the serpent receive the knowledge of good and evil?</i>

First, nowhere does it say the tree of knowledge of good and evil was the only source of sin. God did not create lust for the fruit in Adam and Eve's heart, but rather they created their own lust. In the same way, the serpent was enticed by his own lust and it gave birth to sin, that is to say, evil.

<i>If God created everything, tell me how he is not implicated either directly or indirectly concerning everything that goes down?</i>

There was once a week-long summer camp where all the children were given disposable cameras for the use of taking pictures. Instead of taking pictures, however, many children disassembled the cameras and used the flash batteries as sort of a mini-stun gun. Now, I wouldn't blame the manufacturer of the disposable camera for this. I wouldn't even blame the person who provided the cameras. I would hold the children responsible for their own actions.



As for the rest of your questions and criticism, I don't really know how to answer them besides what I've already said.

 

[Solo]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I thought we were talking about the doctrine of Christianity. </end quote></div>

Oh but we are. You see the bible is the backbone of the Christian faith. Christianity either stands or falls in the veracity of the bible. The bible is the source of your God claims. It was written by many different authors over many different eras. All of it was penned by men, this subject to their prejudices and biases. I think it basically is about who is begotten by who and is meant to reinforce the idea of how you must worship God.


<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>In 2 Peter 1:21-21 it says, "Know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

Further, Paul writes, "For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words." 1 Corinthians 2:10-11.

Therefore, the writer of Hebrews was able to write about the creation of the universe, because he had within himself the Spirit of God.

Do not assume, however, that I or any other Christian am relying on the word of Paul, or any other man who wrote the Bible. For in 1 John 5:6-8, it says, "This is the One who came by water and blood, *****; not with the water only, but with the water and the blood. It is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."

Now, the water is the Word of God and the blood is the works of God (see John 5:36-40). It is the Spirit who testifies of the water and the blood, so that we may know what comes from God and what does not. And we know that the Holy Spirit is available to all who believe.

Therefore, it is the very Spirit within me that testifies the Bible is true. Furthermore, it is the Spirit within me who testifies of the interpretation of the Bible. For, "When He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak of His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come." John 16:13 </end quote></div>

Well without the sermon here, why do you place your faith in what Paul, or in what any other fallible human, for that matter claims? Shouldn't you only take word in the horse's mouth? Paul could have been an alcoholic, or he could have been crazy. But the thing about Paul is that he needed an eyewitness encounter with Jesus to solidify his faith, but now we are to just take the word of some ancient tribals with heat stroke. God was blessed with the gift of gab in the OT, yet with all of our technological marvels we have not heard a peep from him. Why do you think that is Mockingbird?

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>It doesn't say anywhere God had to rest. God rested because He wanted to. God had just created the world, and He wanted to sit back and enjoy it for a while. </end quote></div>

Imagine if you and your friends go see a movie that you already seen, in fact it's fresh in your memory. Now before everything happens, you know what the actors are gonna say and do and what goes down; the plots, subplots, etc. Wouldn't you be mighty bored if you already knew everything about the movie, opposed to seeing it for the very first time. The truth is you'd enjoy it a lot more if you didn't already know how it's going to play out.



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Suppose you have a child who wants nothing to do with you. You can be physically present as much as you wish, but the child is still going to separate himself from you mentally, emotionally, and socially. Now, unlike a human parent, God has the ability to force His way in and control the child like a robot, but instead He gives us the freedom to make our own choices. </end quote></div>

And I suppose you think that's wise of him? I have a question for you Mockingbird- does God infinitely love humans? Is God all-knowing, meaning does he know what has been and ever will be? You say he wants us to have free will, but I know I'd rather be free to avoid agonizing mental and physical torture in hell when I die. Now at the onset of creation, God makes a new person, and at this time God has all the knowledge of the deeds, and choices the person will make in his life. Now when God made Jeffrey Dahmer, he knew beforehand of everything he would do. Did Jeffrey Dahmer have Free will? God makes all of us with certain tastes, preferences and intellect. I think the general consensus among psychologists is that serial killing is a compulsion. Now wouldn't the source of that compulsion just have to be our creator? How on earth could a loving, compassionate God plant evil compulsions in us and then go on to punish us for acting on these very same compulsions that he himself instilled in us? God is kinda acting like a deranged watchmaker, as he makes all sorts of faulty watches, then goes on to blame the watches for being faulty. Evil happens because people CAN CHOOSE. Now let's say I tell you to drinka cup of urine. Now of course you'll decline (unless you have some weird compulsion) because it's disgusting. But you still could've chosen to do so; your free will is still very much intact. My point here being that God could have given humans free will AND a natural tendency not to sin. Jesus had free will and he didn't sin, so God has no excuse. All the bad things that happens in this world gets shoveled right back to God.
I think Free will alone debunks the basic tenets of Christianity. Suffering is an undermining pin in the foundation of Christianity. Since God gives humans free will that equals that some of us can go to hell, without free will we all do as God wants and go to heaven. What do you hold to a higher precedent- having the choice to do harmful actions or living a life free of agonizing torture?



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>First, nowhere does it say the tree of knowledge of good and evil was the only source of sin. God did not create lust for the fruit in Adam and Eve's heart, but rather they created their own lust. In the same way, the serpent was enticed by his own lust and it gave birth to sin, that is to say, evil. </end quote></div>

So was there someone else who created sin, that God didn't know about? I'm telling you, this whole sin argument is total negligence on the part of God. He placed evil directly in Adam's food source. Think of it like so, at the time of creation, and if God wanted to, he could have placed the evil knowledge on some beanstalk, millions of light years away. I could hide chocolate anywhere in my house, but I choose to hide it in my dog's food dish. Now Mockingbird, would you say that's right, or wrong?
God made the snake. At the time of creation, he knew exactly what it was out to do. The snake apparently had prior knowledge of evil. The only 2 places where the snake could learn about evil were the tree and God. The serpent did not eat from the tree, so we can safely assume that God gave the serpent the knowledge of evil. It matters little if you say the serpent was enticed by his lust, Genesis states that God created all animals.
If you say there was another source of sin besides the tree or God, then your God is a jackass,(excuse the language) with no clue what he is doing. Either he willingly allowed someone or something to tamper with his creation or he was unable to prevent it. Either way, why call him God then?
The story of original sin is cleverly devised hyperbole meant to control the masses. Adam and Eve were set-up by their creator right from the start. They made an honest mistake, and one that could very well had been avoided had God not wanted it to happen.



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>There was once a week-long summer camp where all the children were given disposable cameras for the use of taking pictures. Instead of taking pictures, however, many children disassembled the cameras and used the flash batteries as sort of a mini-stun gun. Now, I wouldn't blame the manufacturer of the disposable camera for this. I wouldn't even blame the person who provided the cameras. I would hold the children responsible for their own actions. </end quote></div>

Well here's an analogy for you. Suppose I place 2 cars packed full with people on 2 highways. Now these roads intersect at one point, and the cars collide killing everyone in them. Now who is to blame for this unfortunate incident, the people in the cars choosing to drive them, or me, who set this whole shebang up? Now the bible is crystal clear on the fact that God is love and suffering is the result of mankind choosing to sin; that's Christianity's way of passing the buck of blame onto humans. Now the main problem I see with this little hypothesis is that humans did not create the universe, God did. If God is all knowing, and at the time of birth, he knows a baby will grow up and murder millions. Now why let this person be born only to make others suffer and eventually to suffer himself endlessly? Wouldn't it be easier, not to mention more practical not to make him in the first place?



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>As for the rest of your questions and criticism, I don't really know how to answer them besides what I've already said. </end quote></div>

Fair enough.

 

[Solo]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I thought we were talking about the doctrine of Christianity. </end quote></div>

Oh but we are. You see the bible is the backbone of the Christian faith. Christianity either stands or falls in the veracity of the bible. The bible is the source of your God claims. It was written by many different authors over many different eras. All of it was penned by men, this subject to their prejudices and biases. I think it basically is about who is begotten by who and is meant to reinforce the idea of how you must worship God.


<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>In 2 Peter 1:21-21 it says, "Know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

Further, Paul writes, "For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words." 1 Corinthians 2:10-11.

Therefore, the writer of Hebrews was able to write about the creation of the universe, because he had within himself the Spirit of God.

Do not assume, however, that I or any other Christian am relying on the word of Paul, or any other man who wrote the Bible. For in 1 John 5:6-8, it says, "This is the One who came by water and blood, *****; not with the water only, but with the water and the blood. It is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."

Now, the water is the Word of God and the blood is the works of God (see John 5:36-40). It is the Spirit who testifies of the water and the blood, so that we may know what comes from God and what does not. And we know that the Holy Spirit is available to all who believe.

Therefore, it is the very Spirit within me that testifies the Bible is true. Furthermore, it is the Spirit within me who testifies of the interpretation of the Bible. For, "When He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak of His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come." John 16:13 </end quote></div>

Well without the sermon here, why do you place your faith in what Paul, or in what any other fallible human, for that matter claims? Shouldn't you only take word in the horse's mouth? Paul could have been an alcoholic, or he could have been crazy. But the thing about Paul is that he needed an eyewitness encounter with Jesus to solidify his faith, but now we are to just take the word of some ancient tribals with heat stroke. God was blessed with the gift of gab in the OT, yet with all of our technological marvels we have not heard a peep from him. Why do you think that is Mockingbird?

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>It doesn't say anywhere God had to rest. God rested because He wanted to. God had just created the world, and He wanted to sit back and enjoy it for a while. </end quote></div>

Imagine if you and your friends go see a movie that you already seen, in fact it's fresh in your memory. Now before everything happens, you know what the actors are gonna say and do and what goes down; the plots, subplots, etc. Wouldn't you be mighty bored if you already knew everything about the movie, opposed to seeing it for the very first time. The truth is you'd enjoy it a lot more if you didn't already know how it's going to play out.



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Suppose you have a child who wants nothing to do with you. You can be physically present as much as you wish, but the child is still going to separate himself from you mentally, emotionally, and socially. Now, unlike a human parent, God has the ability to force His way in and control the child like a robot, but instead He gives us the freedom to make our own choices. </end quote></div>

And I suppose you think that's wise of him? I have a question for you Mockingbird- does God infinitely love humans? Is God all-knowing, meaning does he know what has been and ever will be? You say he wants us to have free will, but I know I'd rather be free to avoid agonizing mental and physical torture in hell when I die. Now at the onset of creation, God makes a new person, and at this time God has all the knowledge of the deeds, and choices the person will make in his life. Now when God made Jeffrey Dahmer, he knew beforehand of everything he would do. Did Jeffrey Dahmer have Free will? God makes all of us with certain tastes, preferences and intellect. I think the general consensus among psychologists is that serial killing is a compulsion. Now wouldn't the source of that compulsion just have to be our creator? How on earth could a loving, compassionate God plant evil compulsions in us and then go on to punish us for acting on these very same compulsions that he himself instilled in us? God is kinda acting like a deranged watchmaker, as he makes all sorts of faulty watches, then goes on to blame the watches for being faulty. Evil happens because people CAN CHOOSE. Now let's say I tell you to drinka cup of urine. Now of course you'll decline (unless you have some weird compulsion) because it's disgusting. But you still could've chosen to do so; your free will is still very much intact. My point here being that God could have given humans free will AND a natural tendency not to sin. Jesus had free will and he didn't sin, so God has no excuse. All the bad things that happens in this world gets shoveled right back to God.
I think Free will alone debunks the basic tenets of Christianity. Suffering is an undermining pin in the foundation of Christianity. Since God gives humans free will that equals that some of us can go to hell, without free will we all do as God wants and go to heaven. What do you hold to a higher precedent- having the choice to do harmful actions or living a life free of agonizing torture?



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>First, nowhere does it say the tree of knowledge of good and evil was the only source of sin. God did not create lust for the fruit in Adam and Eve's heart, but rather they created their own lust. In the same way, the serpent was enticed by his own lust and it gave birth to sin, that is to say, evil. </end quote></div>

So was there someone else who created sin, that God didn't know about? I'm telling you, this whole sin argument is total negligence on the part of God. He placed evil directly in Adam's food source. Think of it like so, at the time of creation, and if God wanted to, he could have placed the evil knowledge on some beanstalk, millions of light years away. I could hide chocolate anywhere in my house, but I choose to hide it in my dog's food dish. Now Mockingbird, would you say that's right, or wrong?
God made the snake. At the time of creation, he knew exactly what it was out to do. The snake apparently had prior knowledge of evil. The only 2 places where the snake could learn about evil were the tree and God. The serpent did not eat from the tree, so we can safely assume that God gave the serpent the knowledge of evil. It matters little if you say the serpent was enticed by his lust, Genesis states that God created all animals.
If you say there was another source of sin besides the tree or God, then your God is a jackass,(excuse the language) with no clue what he is doing. Either he willingly allowed someone or something to tamper with his creation or he was unable to prevent it. Either way, why call him God then?
The story of original sin is cleverly devised hyperbole meant to control the masses. Adam and Eve were set-up by their creator right from the start. They made an honest mistake, and one that could very well had been avoided had God not wanted it to happen.



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>There was once a week-long summer camp where all the children were given disposable cameras for the use of taking pictures. Instead of taking pictures, however, many children disassembled the cameras and used the flash batteries as sort of a mini-stun gun. Now, I wouldn't blame the manufacturer of the disposable camera for this. I wouldn't even blame the person who provided the cameras. I would hold the children responsible for their own actions. </end quote></div>

Well here's an analogy for you. Suppose I place 2 cars packed full with people on 2 highways. Now these roads intersect at one point, and the cars collide killing everyone in them. Now who is to blame for this unfortunate incident, the people in the cars choosing to drive them, or me, who set this whole shebang up? Now the bible is crystal clear on the fact that God is love and suffering is the result of mankind choosing to sin; that's Christianity's way of passing the buck of blame onto humans. Now the main problem I see with this little hypothesis is that humans did not create the universe, God did. If God is all knowing, and at the time of birth, he knows a baby will grow up and murder millions. Now why let this person be born only to make others suffer and eventually to suffer himself endlessly? Wouldn't it be easier, not to mention more practical not to make him in the first place?



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>As for the rest of your questions and criticism, I don't really know how to answer them besides what I've already said. </end quote></div>

Fair enough.

 

[Solo]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I thought we were talking about the doctrine of Christianity. </end quote></div>

Oh but we are. You see the bible is the backbone of the Christian faith. Christianity either stands or falls in the veracity of the bible. The bible is the source of your God claims. It was written by many different authors over many different eras. All of it was penned by men, this subject to their prejudices and biases. I think it basically is about who is begotten by who and is meant to reinforce the idea of how you must worship God.


<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>In 2 Peter 1:21-21 it says, "Know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

Further, Paul writes, "For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words." 1 Corinthians 2:10-11.

Therefore, the writer of Hebrews was able to write about the creation of the universe, because he had within himself the Spirit of God.

Do not assume, however, that I or any other Christian am relying on the word of Paul, or any other man who wrote the Bible. For in 1 John 5:6-8, it says, "This is the One who came by water and blood, *****; not with the water only, but with the water and the blood. It is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."

Now, the water is the Word of God and the blood is the works of God (see John 5:36-40). It is the Spirit who testifies of the water and the blood, so that we may know what comes from God and what does not. And we know that the Holy Spirit is available to all who believe.

Therefore, it is the very Spirit within me that testifies the Bible is true. Furthermore, it is the Spirit within me who testifies of the interpretation of the Bible. For, "When He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak of His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come." John 16:13 </end quote></div>

Well without the sermon here, why do you place your faith in what Paul, or in what any other fallible human, for that matter claims? Shouldn't you only take word in the horse's mouth? Paul could have been an alcoholic, or he could have been crazy. But the thing about Paul is that he needed an eyewitness encounter with Jesus to solidify his faith, but now we are to just take the word of some ancient tribals with heat stroke. God was blessed with the gift of gab in the OT, yet with all of our technological marvels we have not heard a peep from him. Why do you think that is Mockingbird?

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>It doesn't say anywhere God had to rest. God rested because He wanted to. God had just created the world, and He wanted to sit back and enjoy it for a while. </end quote></div>

Imagine if you and your friends go see a movie that you already seen, in fact it's fresh in your memory. Now before everything happens, you know what the actors are gonna say and do and what goes down; the plots, subplots, etc. Wouldn't you be mighty bored if you already knew everything about the movie, opposed to seeing it for the very first time. The truth is you'd enjoy it a lot more if you didn't already know how it's going to play out.



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Suppose you have a child who wants nothing to do with you. You can be physically present as much as you wish, but the child is still going to separate himself from you mentally, emotionally, and socially. Now, unlike a human parent, God has the ability to force His way in and control the child like a robot, but instead He gives us the freedom to make our own choices. </end quote></div>

And I suppose you think that's wise of him? I have a question for you Mockingbird- does God infinitely love humans? Is God all-knowing, meaning does he know what has been and ever will be? You say he wants us to have free will, but I know I'd rather be free to avoid agonizing mental and physical torture in hell when I die. Now at the onset of creation, God makes a new person, and at this time God has all the knowledge of the deeds, and choices the person will make in his life. Now when God made Jeffrey Dahmer, he knew beforehand of everything he would do. Did Jeffrey Dahmer have Free will? God makes all of us with certain tastes, preferences and intellect. I think the general consensus among psychologists is that serial killing is a compulsion. Now wouldn't the source of that compulsion just have to be our creator? How on earth could a loving, compassionate God plant evil compulsions in us and then go on to punish us for acting on these very same compulsions that he himself instilled in us? God is kinda acting like a deranged watchmaker, as he makes all sorts of faulty watches, then goes on to blame the watches for being faulty. Evil happens because people CAN CHOOSE. Now let's say I tell you to drinka cup of urine. Now of course you'll decline (unless you have some weird compulsion) because it's disgusting. But you still could've chosen to do so; your free will is still very much intact. My point here being that God could have given humans free will AND a natural tendency not to sin. Jesus had free will and he didn't sin, so God has no excuse. All the bad things that happens in this world gets shoveled right back to God.
I think Free will alone debunks the basic tenets of Christianity. Suffering is an undermining pin in the foundation of Christianity. Since God gives humans free will that equals that some of us can go to hell, without free will we all do as God wants and go to heaven. What do you hold to a higher precedent- having the choice to do harmful actions or living a life free of agonizing torture?



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>First, nowhere does it say the tree of knowledge of good and evil was the only source of sin. God did not create lust for the fruit in Adam and Eve's heart, but rather they created their own lust. In the same way, the serpent was enticed by his own lust and it gave birth to sin, that is to say, evil. </end quote></div>

So was there someone else who created sin, that God didn't know about? I'm telling you, this whole sin argument is total negligence on the part of God. He placed evil directly in Adam's food source. Think of it like so, at the time of creation, and if God wanted to, he could have placed the evil knowledge on some beanstalk, millions of light years away. I could hide chocolate anywhere in my house, but I choose to hide it in my dog's food dish. Now Mockingbird, would you say that's right, or wrong?
God made the snake. At the time of creation, he knew exactly what it was out to do. The snake apparently had prior knowledge of evil. The only 2 places where the snake could learn about evil were the tree and God. The serpent did not eat from the tree, so we can safely assume that God gave the serpent the knowledge of evil. It matters little if you say the serpent was enticed by his lust, Genesis states that God created all animals.
If you say there was another source of sin besides the tree or God, then your God is a jackass,(excuse the language) with no clue what he is doing. Either he willingly allowed someone or something to tamper with his creation or he was unable to prevent it. Either way, why call him God then?
The story of original sin is cleverly devised hyperbole meant to control the masses. Adam and Eve were set-up by their creator right from the start. They made an honest mistake, and one that could very well had been avoided had God not wanted it to happen.



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>There was once a week-long summer camp where all the children were given disposable cameras for the use of taking pictures. Instead of taking pictures, however, many children disassembled the cameras and used the flash batteries as sort of a mini-stun gun. Now, I wouldn't blame the manufacturer of the disposable camera for this. I wouldn't even blame the person who provided the cameras. I would hold the children responsible for their own actions. </end quote></div>

Well here's an analogy for you. Suppose I place 2 cars packed full with people on 2 highways. Now these roads intersect at one point, and the cars collide killing everyone in them. Now who is to blame for this unfortunate incident, the people in the cars choosing to drive them, or me, who set this whole shebang up? Now the bible is crystal clear on the fact that God is love and suffering is the result of mankind choosing to sin; that's Christianity's way of passing the buck of blame onto humans. Now the main problem I see with this little hypothesis is that humans did not create the universe, God did. If God is all knowing, and at the time of birth, he knows a baby will grow up and murder millions. Now why let this person be born only to make others suffer and eventually to suffer himself endlessly? Wouldn't it be easier, not to mention more practical not to make him in the first place?



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>As for the rest of your questions and criticism, I don't really know how to answer them besides what I've already said. </end quote></div>

Fair enough.

 

[Solo]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I thought we were talking about the doctrine of Christianity. </end quote>

Oh but we are. You see the bible is the backbone of the Christian faith. Christianity either stands or falls in the veracity of the bible. The bible is the source of your God claims. It was written by many different authors over many different eras. All of it was penned by men, this subject to their prejudices and biases. I think it basically is about who is begotten by who and is meant to reinforce the idea of how you must worship God.


<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>In 2 Peter 1:21-21 it says, "Know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

Further, Paul writes, "For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words." 1 Corinthians 2:10-11.

Therefore, the writer of Hebrews was able to write about the creation of the universe, because he had within himself the Spirit of God.

Do not assume, however, that I or any other Christian am relying on the word of Paul, or any other man who wrote the Bible. For in 1 John 5:6-8, it says, "This is the One who came by water and blood, *****; not with the water only, but with the water and the blood. It is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."

Now, the water is the Word of God and the blood is the works of God (see John 5:36-40). It is the Spirit who testifies of the water and the blood, so that we may know what comes from God and what does not. And we know that the Holy Spirit is available to all who believe.

Therefore, it is the very Spirit within me that testifies the Bible is true. Furthermore, it is the Spirit within me who testifies of the interpretation of the Bible. For, "When He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak of His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come." John 16:13 </end quote>

Well without the sermon here, why do you place your faith in what Paul, or in what any other fallible human, for that matter claims? Shouldn't you only take word in the horse's mouth? Paul could have been an alcoholic, or he could have been crazy. But the thing about Paul is that he needed an eyewitness encounter with Jesus to solidify his faith, but now we are to just take the word of some ancient tribals with heat stroke. God was blessed with the gift of gab in the OT, yet with all of our technological marvels we have not heard a peep from him. Why do you think that is Mockingbird?

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>It doesn't say anywhere God had to rest. God rested because He wanted to. God had just created the world, and He wanted to sit back and enjoy it for a while. </end quote>

Imagine if you and your friends go see a movie that you already seen, in fact it's fresh in your memory. Now before everything happens, you know what the actors are gonna say and do and what goes down; the plots, subplots, etc. Wouldn't you be mighty bored if you already knew everything about the movie, opposed to seeing it for the very first time. The truth is you'd enjoy it a lot more if you didn't already know how it's going to play out.



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Suppose you have a child who wants nothing to do with you. You can be physically present as much as you wish, but the child is still going to separate himself from you mentally, emotionally, and socially. Now, unlike a human parent, God has the ability to force His way in and control the child like a robot, but instead He gives us the freedom to make our own choices. </end quote>

And I suppose you think that's wise of him? I have a question for you Mockingbird- does God infinitely love humans? Is God all-knowing, meaning does he know what has been and ever will be? You say he wants us to have free will, but I know I'd rather be free to avoid agonizing mental and physical torture in hell when I die. Now at the onset of creation, God makes a new person, and at this time God has all the knowledge of the deeds, and choices the person will make in his life. Now when God made Jeffrey Dahmer, he knew beforehand of everything he would do. Did Jeffrey Dahmer have Free will? God makes all of us with certain tastes, preferences and intellect. I think the general consensus among psychologists is that serial killing is a compulsion. Now wouldn't the source of that compulsion just have to be our creator? How on earth could a loving, compassionate God plant evil compulsions in us and then go on to punish us for acting on these very same compulsions that he himself instilled in us? God is kinda acting like a deranged watchmaker, as he makes all sorts of faulty watches, then goes on to blame the watches for being faulty. Evil happens because people CAN CHOOSE. Now let's say I tell you to drinka cup of urine. Now of course you'll decline (unless you have some weird compulsion) because it's disgusting. But you still could've chosen to do so; your free will is still very much intact. My point here being that God could have given humans free will AND a natural tendency not to sin. Jesus had free will and he didn't sin, so God has no excuse. All the bad things that happens in this world gets shoveled right back to God.
I think Free will alone debunks the basic tenets of Christianity. Suffering is an undermining pin in the foundation of Christianity. Since God gives humans free will that equals that some of us can go to hell, without free will we all do as God wants and go to heaven. What do you hold to a higher precedent- having the choice to do harmful actions or living a life free of agonizing torture?



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>First, nowhere does it say the tree of knowledge of good and evil was the only source of sin. God did not create lust for the fruit in Adam and Eve's heart, but rather they created their own lust. In the same way, the serpent was enticed by his own lust and it gave birth to sin, that is to say, evil. </end quote>

So was there someone else who created sin, that God didn't know about? I'm telling you, this whole sin argument is total negligence on the part of God. He placed evil directly in Adam's food source. Think of it like so, at the time of creation, and if God wanted to, he could have placed the evil knowledge on some beanstalk, millions of light years away. I could hide chocolate anywhere in my house, but I choose to hide it in my dog's food dish. Now Mockingbird, would you say that's right, or wrong?
God made the snake. At the time of creation, he knew exactly what it was out to do. The snake apparently had prior knowledge of evil. The only 2 places where the snake could learn about evil were the tree and God. The serpent did not eat from the tree, so we can safely assume that God gave the serpent the knowledge of evil. It matters little if you say the serpent was enticed by his lust, Genesis states that God created all animals.
If you say there was another source of sin besides the tree or God, then your God is a jackass,(excuse the language) with no clue what he is doing. Either he willingly allowed someone or something to tamper with his creation or he was unable to prevent it. Either way, why call him God then?
The story of original sin is cleverly devised hyperbole meant to control the masses. Adam and Eve were set-up by their creator right from the start. They made an honest mistake, and one that could very well had been avoided had God not wanted it to happen.



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>There was once a week-long summer camp where all the children were given disposable cameras for the use of taking pictures. Instead of taking pictures, however, many children disassembled the cameras and used the flash batteries as sort of a mini-stun gun. Now, I wouldn't blame the manufacturer of the disposable camera for this. I wouldn't even blame the person who provided the cameras. I would hold the children responsible for their own actions. </end quote>

Well here's an analogy for you. Suppose I place 2 cars packed full with people on 2 highways. Now these roads intersect at one point, and the cars collide killing everyone in them. Now who is to blame for this unfortunate incident, the people in the cars choosing to drive them, or me, who set this whole shebang up? Now the bible is crystal clear on the fact that God is love and suffering is the result of mankind choosing to sin; that's Christianity's way of passing the buck of blame onto humans. Now the main problem I see with this little hypothesis is that humans did not create the universe, God did. If God is all knowing, and at the time of birth, he knows a baby will grow up and murder millions. Now why let this person be born only to make others suffer and eventually to suffer himself endlessly? Wouldn't it be easier, not to mention more practical not to make him in the first place?



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>As for the rest of your questions and criticism, I don't really know how to answer them besides what I've already said. </end quote>

Fair enough.

 

[Solo]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I thought we were talking about the doctrine of Christianity. </end quote>

Oh but we are. You see the bible is the backbone of the Christian faith. Christianity either stands or falls in the veracity of the bible. The bible is the source of your God claims. It was written by many different authors over many different eras. All of it was penned by men, this subject to their prejudices and biases. I think it basically is about who is begotten by who and is meant to reinforce the idea of how you must worship God.


<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>In 2 Peter 1:21-21 it says, "Know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

Further, Paul writes, "For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words." 1 Corinthians 2:10-11.

Therefore, the writer of Hebrews was able to write about the creation of the universe, because he had within himself the Spirit of God.

Do not assume, however, that I or any other Christian am relying on the word of Paul, or any other man who wrote the Bible. For in 1 John 5:6-8, it says, "This is the One who came by water and blood, *****; not with the water only, but with the water and the blood. It is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."

Now, the water is the Word of God and the blood is the works of God (see John 5:36-40). It is the Spirit who testifies of the water and the blood, so that we may know what comes from God and what does not. And we know that the Holy Spirit is available to all who believe.

Therefore, it is the very Spirit within me that testifies the Bible is true. Furthermore, it is the Spirit within me who testifies of the interpretation of the Bible. For, "When He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak of His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come." John 16:13 </end quote>

Well without the sermon here, why do you place your faith in what Paul, or in what any other fallible human, for that matter claims? Shouldn't you only take word in the horse's mouth? Paul could have been an alcoholic, or he could have been crazy. But the thing about Paul is that he needed an eyewitness encounter with Jesus to solidify his faith, but now we are to just take the word of some ancient tribals with heat stroke. God was blessed with the gift of gab in the OT, yet with all of our technological marvels we have not heard a peep from him. Why do you think that is Mockingbird?

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>It doesn't say anywhere God had to rest. God rested because He wanted to. God had just created the world, and He wanted to sit back and enjoy it for a while. </end quote>

Imagine if you and your friends go see a movie that you already seen, in fact it's fresh in your memory. Now before everything happens, you know what the actors are gonna say and do and what goes down; the plots, subplots, etc. Wouldn't you be mighty bored if you already knew everything about the movie, opposed to seeing it for the very first time. The truth is you'd enjoy it a lot more if you didn't already know how it's going to play out.



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Suppose you have a child who wants nothing to do with you. You can be physically present as much as you wish, but the child is still going to separate himself from you mentally, emotionally, and socially. Now, unlike a human parent, God has the ability to force His way in and control the child like a robot, but instead He gives us the freedom to make our own choices. </end quote>

And I suppose you think that's wise of him? I have a question for you Mockingbird- does God infinitely love humans? Is God all-knowing, meaning does he know what has been and ever will be? You say he wants us to have free will, but I know I'd rather be free to avoid agonizing mental and physical torture in hell when I die. Now at the onset of creation, God makes a new person, and at this time God has all the knowledge of the deeds, and choices the person will make in his life. Now when God made Jeffrey Dahmer, he knew beforehand of everything he would do. Did Jeffrey Dahmer have Free will? God makes all of us with certain tastes, preferences and intellect. I think the general consensus among psychologists is that serial killing is a compulsion. Now wouldn't the source of that compulsion just have to be our creator? How on earth could a loving, compassionate God plant evil compulsions in us and then go on to punish us for acting on these very same compulsions that he himself instilled in us? God is kinda acting like a deranged watchmaker, as he makes all sorts of faulty watches, then goes on to blame the watches for being faulty. Evil happens because people CAN CHOOSE. Now let's say I tell you to drinka cup of urine. Now of course you'll decline (unless you have some weird compulsion) because it's disgusting. But you still could've chosen to do so; your free will is still very much intact. My point here being that God could have given humans free will AND a natural tendency not to sin. Jesus had free will and he didn't sin, so God has no excuse. All the bad things that happens in this world gets shoveled right back to God.
I think Free will alone debunks the basic tenets of Christianity. Suffering is an undermining pin in the foundation of Christianity. Since God gives humans free will that equals that some of us can go to hell, without free will we all do as God wants and go to heaven. What do you hold to a higher precedent- having the choice to do harmful actions or living a life free of agonizing torture?



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>First, nowhere does it say the tree of knowledge of good and evil was the only source of sin. God did not create lust for the fruit in Adam and Eve's heart, but rather they created their own lust. In the same way, the serpent was enticed by his own lust and it gave birth to sin, that is to say, evil. </end quote>

So was there someone else who created sin, that God didn't know about? I'm telling you, this whole sin argument is total negligence on the part of God. He placed evil directly in Adam's food source. Think of it like so, at the time of creation, and if God wanted to, he could have placed the evil knowledge on some beanstalk, millions of light years away. I could hide chocolate anywhere in my house, but I choose to hide it in my dog's food dish. Now Mockingbird, would you say that's right, or wrong?
God made the snake. At the time of creation, he knew exactly what it was out to do. The snake apparently had prior knowledge of evil. The only 2 places where the snake could learn about evil were the tree and God. The serpent did not eat from the tree, so we can safely assume that God gave the serpent the knowledge of evil. It matters little if you say the serpent was enticed by his lust, Genesis states that God created all animals.
If you say there was another source of sin besides the tree or God, then your God is a jackass,(excuse the language) with no clue what he is doing. Either he willingly allowed someone or something to tamper with his creation or he was unable to prevent it. Either way, why call him God then?
The story of original sin is cleverly devised hyperbole meant to control the masses. Adam and Eve were set-up by their creator right from the start. They made an honest mistake, and one that could very well had been avoided had God not wanted it to happen.



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>There was once a week-long summer camp where all the children were given disposable cameras for the use of taking pictures. Instead of taking pictures, however, many children disassembled the cameras and used the flash batteries as sort of a mini-stun gun. Now, I wouldn't blame the manufacturer of the disposable camera for this. I wouldn't even blame the person who provided the cameras. I would hold the children responsible for their own actions. </end quote>

Well here's an analogy for you. Suppose I place 2 cars packed full with people on 2 highways. Now these roads intersect at one point, and the cars collide killing everyone in them. Now who is to blame for this unfortunate incident, the people in the cars choosing to drive them, or me, who set this whole shebang up? Now the bible is crystal clear on the fact that God is love and suffering is the result of mankind choosing to sin; that's Christianity's way of passing the buck of blame onto humans. Now the main problem I see with this little hypothesis is that humans did not create the universe, God did. If God is all knowing, and at the time of birth, he knows a baby will grow up and murder millions. Now why let this person be born only to make others suffer and eventually to suffer himself endlessly? Wouldn't it be easier, not to mention more practical not to make him in the first place?



<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>As for the rest of your questions and criticism, I don't really know how to answer them besides what I've already said. </end quote>

Fair enough.

 

[Mockingbird]

You've done a good job of explaining your theology to me and I can see your logic behind it, but i don't really see how that exposes a broken pillar in my faith. I also maintain that you have little understanding of what it is I believe, as evidenced by your repetition in your criticism of my faith.

For example, I said very clearly "Do not assume, however, that I or any other Christian am relying on the word of Paul, or any other man who wrote the Bible." To which you replied "why do you place your faith in what Paul, or in what any other fallible human, for that matter claims?"



<i>God was blessed with the gift of gab in the OT, yet with all of our technological marvels we have not heard a peep from him.</i>

Actually, God does speak to people frequently today. <u>I Dared to Call Him Father</u> by Bilquis Sheikh and <u>Secret Believers</u> by Brother Andrew both contain specific examples of Muslims who became Christian primarily because of visions from God. <u>The Heavenly Man</u> by Brother Yun gives examples of visions of instruction and prophecy. I mention these books as specific examples because they were all written recently, but throughout the history of the Christian Church there are countless examples of God speaking to people.

Furthermore, in the book of Job, it says, "Why do you complain against Him that he does not give an account of all His doings? Indeed God speaks once, or twice, yet no one notices it. In a dream, a vision of the night, when sound sleep falls upon men, while they slumber in their beds, then he opens the ears of men, and seals their instruction, that he may turn man aside from his conduct, and keep man from pride; He keeps back his soul from the pit, and his life from passing over into Sheol.
"Man is also chastened with pain on his bed, and with unceasing complaint in his bones; so that his life loathes bread, and his soul favorite food. his flesh wastes away from sight, and his bones which were not seen stick out. Then his soul draws near to the pit, and his life to those who bring death." Job 33:13-22

Elihu (the man who spoke this passage) talks about God communicating through visions and dreams, but he also says God can speak through discipline, that is to say, pain and suffering. I identify this a lot in my own testimony, and <u>The Heavenly Man</u> by brother Yun also gives many good examples.

<i>God could have given humans free will AND a natural tendency not to sin</i>

I think He did. All humans have some kind of a conscience, a sense of right and wrong. A person does not have to be a Christian (meaning connected to God) to be a moral person. As it says, "For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written on their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them." Romans 2:14-15

Furthermore, I see many people in this world with a yearning for God, whether they want to admit it or not.



Anyway, I'm sure you have other criticisms of Christianity besides creation. In order to keep the discussion interesting I suggest we move on to the next pillar.

 

[Mockingbird]

You've done a good job of explaining your theology to me and I can see your logic behind it, but i don't really see how that exposes a broken pillar in my faith. I also maintain that you have little understanding of what it is I believe, as evidenced by your repetition in your criticism of my faith.

For example, I said very clearly "Do not assume, however, that I or any other Christian am relying on the word of Paul, or any other man who wrote the Bible." To which you replied "why do you place your faith in what Paul, or in what any other fallible human, for that matter claims?"



<i>God was blessed with the gift of gab in the OT, yet with all of our technological marvels we have not heard a peep from him.</i>

Actually, God does speak to people frequently today. <u>I Dared to Call Him Father</u> by Bilquis Sheikh and <u>Secret Believers</u> by Brother Andrew both contain specific examples of Muslims who became Christian primarily because of visions from God. <u>The Heavenly Man</u> by Brother Yun gives examples of visions of instruction and prophecy. I mention these books as specific examples because they were all written recently, but throughout the history of the Christian Church there are countless examples of God speaking to people.

Furthermore, in the book of Job, it says, "Why do you complain against Him that he does not give an account of all His doings? Indeed God speaks once, or twice, yet no one notices it. In a dream, a vision of the night, when sound sleep falls upon men, while they slumber in their beds, then he opens the ears of men, and seals their instruction, that he may turn man aside from his conduct, and keep man from pride; He keeps back his soul from the pit, and his life from passing over into Sheol.
"Man is also chastened with pain on his bed, and with unceasing complaint in his bones; so that his life loathes bread, and his soul favorite food. his flesh wastes away from sight, and his bones which were not seen stick out. Then his soul draws near to the pit, and his life to those who bring death." Job 33:13-22

Elihu (the man who spoke this passage) talks about God communicating through visions and dreams, but he also says God can speak through discipline, that is to say, pain and suffering. I identify this a lot in my own testimony, and <u>The Heavenly Man</u> by brother Yun also gives many good examples.

<i>God could have given humans free will AND a natural tendency not to sin</i>

I think He did. All humans have some kind of a conscience, a sense of right and wrong. A person does not have to be a Christian (meaning connected to God) to be a moral person. As it says, "For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written on their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them." Romans 2:14-15

Furthermore, I see many people in this world with a yearning for God, whether they want to admit it or not.



Anyway, I'm sure you have other criticisms of Christianity besides creation. In order to keep the discussion interesting I suggest we move on to the next pillar.

 

[Mockingbird]

You've done a good job of explaining your theology to me and I can see your logic behind it, but i don't really see how that exposes a broken pillar in my faith. I also maintain that you have little understanding of what it is I believe, as evidenced by your repetition in your criticism of my faith.

For example, I said very clearly "Do not assume, however, that I or any other Christian am relying on the word of Paul, or any other man who wrote the Bible." To which you replied "why do you place your faith in what Paul, or in what any other fallible human, for that matter claims?"



<i>God was blessed with the gift of gab in the OT, yet with all of our technological marvels we have not heard a peep from him.</i>

Actually, God does speak to people frequently today. <u>I Dared to Call Him Father</u> by Bilquis Sheikh and <u>Secret Believers</u> by Brother Andrew both contain specific examples of Muslims who became Christian primarily because of visions from God. <u>The Heavenly Man</u> by Brother Yun gives examples of visions of instruction and prophecy. I mention these books as specific examples because they were all written recently, but throughout the history of the Christian Church there are countless examples of God speaking to people.

Furthermore, in the book of Job, it says, "Why do you complain against Him that he does not give an account of all His doings? Indeed God speaks once, or twice, yet no one notices it. In a dream, a vision of the night, when sound sleep falls upon men, while they slumber in their beds, then he opens the ears of men, and seals their instruction, that he may turn man aside from his conduct, and keep man from pride; He keeps back his soul from the pit, and his life from passing over into Sheol.
"Man is also chastened with pain on his bed, and with unceasing complaint in his bones; so that his life loathes bread, and his soul favorite food. his flesh wastes away from sight, and his bones which were not seen stick out. Then his soul draws near to the pit, and his life to those who bring death." Job 33:13-22

Elihu (the man who spoke this passage) talks about God communicating through visions and dreams, but he also says God can speak through discipline, that is to say, pain and suffering. I identify this a lot in my own testimony, and <u>The Heavenly Man</u> by brother Yun also gives many good examples.

<i>God could have given humans free will AND a natural tendency not to sin</i>

I think He did. All humans have some kind of a conscience, a sense of right and wrong. A person does not have to be a Christian (meaning connected to God) to be a moral person. As it says, "For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written on their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them." Romans 2:14-15

Furthermore, I see many people in this world with a yearning for God, whether they want to admit it or not.



Anyway, I'm sure you have other criticisms of Christianity besides creation. In order to keep the discussion interesting I suggest we move on to the next pillar.

 

[Mockingbird]

You've done a good job of explaining your theology to me and I can see your logic behind it, but i don't really see how that exposes a broken pillar in my faith. I also maintain that you have little understanding of what it is I believe, as evidenced by your repetition in your criticism of my faith.

For example, I said very clearly "Do not assume, however, that I or any other Christian am relying on the word of Paul, or any other man who wrote the Bible." To which you replied "why do you place your faith in what Paul, or in what any other fallible human, for that matter claims?"



<i>God was blessed with the gift of gab in the OT, yet with all of our technological marvels we have not heard a peep from him.</i>

Actually, God does speak to people frequently today. <u>I Dared to Call Him Father</u> by Bilquis Sheikh and <u>Secret Believers</u> by Brother Andrew both contain specific examples of Muslims who became Christian primarily because of visions from God. <u>The Heavenly Man</u> by Brother Yun gives examples of visions of instruction and prophecy. I mention these books as specific examples because they were all written recently, but throughout the history of the Christian Church there are countless examples of God speaking to people.

Furthermore, in the book of Job, it says, "Why do you complain against Him that he does not give an account of all His doings? Indeed God speaks once, or twice, yet no one notices it. In a dream, a vision of the night, when sound sleep falls upon men, while they slumber in their beds, then he opens the ears of men, and seals their instruction, that he may turn man aside from his conduct, and keep man from pride; He keeps back his soul from the pit, and his life from passing over into Sheol.
"Man is also chastened with pain on his bed, and with unceasing complaint in his bones; so that his life loathes bread, and his soul favorite food. his flesh wastes away from sight, and his bones which were not seen stick out. Then his soul draws near to the pit, and his life to those who bring death." Job 33:13-22

Elihu (the man who spoke this passage) talks about God communicating through visions and dreams, but he also says God can speak through discipline, that is to say, pain and suffering. I identify this a lot in my own testimony, and <u>The Heavenly Man</u> by brother Yun also gives many good examples.

<i>God could have given humans free will AND a natural tendency not to sin</i>

I think He did. All humans have some kind of a conscience, a sense of right and wrong. A person does not have to be a Christian (meaning connected to God) to be a moral person. As it says, "For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written on their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them." Romans 2:14-15

Furthermore, I see many people in this world with a yearning for God, whether they want to admit it or not.



Anyway, I'm sure you have other criticisms of Christianity besides creation. In order to keep the discussion interesting I suggest we move on to the next pillar.

 

[Mockingbird]

You've done a good job of explaining your theology to me and I can see your logic behind it, but i don't really see how that exposes a broken pillar in my faith. I also maintain that you have little understanding of what it is I believe, as evidenced by your repetition in your criticism of my faith.

For example, I said very clearly "Do not assume, however, that I or any other Christian am relying on the word of Paul, or any other man who wrote the Bible." To which you replied "why do you place your faith in what Paul, or in what any other fallible human, for that matter claims?"



<i>God was blessed with the gift of gab in the OT, yet with all of our technological marvels we have not heard a peep from him.</i>

Actually, God does speak to people frequently today. <u>I Dared to Call Him Father</u> by Bilquis Sheikh and <u>Secret Believers</u> by Brother Andrew both contain specific examples of Muslims who became Christian primarily because of visions from God. <u>The Heavenly Man</u> by Brother Yun gives examples of visions of instruction and prophecy. I mention these books as specific examples because they were all written recently, but throughout the history of the Christian Church there are countless examples of God speaking to people.

Furthermore, in the book of Job, it says, "Why do you complain against Him that he does not give an account of all His doings? Indeed God speaks once, or twice, yet no one notices it. In a dream, a vision of the night, when sound sleep falls upon men, while they slumber in their beds, then he opens the ears of men, and seals their instruction, that he may turn man aside from his conduct, and keep man from pride; He keeps back his soul from the pit, and his life from passing over into Sheol.
"Man is also chastened with pain on his bed, and with unceasing complaint in his bones; so that his life loathes bread, and his soul favorite food. his flesh wastes away from sight, and his bones which were not seen stick out. Then his soul draws near to the pit, and his life to those who bring death." Job 33:13-22

Elihu (the man who spoke this passage) talks about God communicating through visions and dreams, but he also says God can speak through discipline, that is to say, pain and suffering. I identify this a lot in my own testimony, and <u>The Heavenly Man</u> by brother Yun also gives many good examples.

<i>God could have given humans free will AND a natural tendency not to sin</i>

I think He did. All humans have some kind of a conscience, a sense of right and wrong. A person does not have to be a Christian (meaning connected to God) to be a moral person. As it says, "For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written on their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them." Romans 2:14-15

Furthermore, I see many people in this world with a yearning for God, whether they want to admit it or not.



Anyway, I'm sure you have other criticisms of Christianity besides creation. In order to keep the discussion interesting I suggest we move on to the next pillar.