God and Suffering (page 29)

leavingwt

PSac doesn't assume that people who disagree with him will spend eternity in Hell. It's that simple.

AK - Jeff

PSac doesn't assume that people who disagree with him will spend eternity in Hell.

But I thought we had first class tickets? Bummer.

Jeff

Perry

Perry and PSac both speak from their personal faith. The difference to me is that PSac is respectful and non dogmatic. Perry's views are not. PSac allows for my own path, and everyone else here. Perry believes in a god that will destroy us all eventually, since we are born sinners and thus merit the suffering that we are experiencing right now, unless of course, we accept Jesus.

And this is how people who RUN LIKE HELL FROM A GOOD ARGUMENT act. They transform their opponent rather than address the question.

Please show where I sad God will destroy people? It doesn't exist. Never said that. This is the phobia that the WT says....REMEMBER?

Furthermore, people already die ... do they not? Of course they do. This is consistent with a race who are disconnected from the SOURCE of Life. God isn't going to cause destruction...people are being destroyed all around us every day already. People really need to take their Kingdom Hall clothers off.

I have two questions directed squarely at the two Jeffs:

1. What is intrinsically illogical about the biblical explanation about God and Suffering co-existing?

2. Please explain by what possible measure of logic you can employ to prop up your illusion that a JUST GOD will not Judge? For if God refuses to judge people, then this must mean that God is evil....having to ability to judge and refusing to do so.

I, like others enjoyed Psac testimony of how he came to the Lord. Each is very personal.

Personally, I never would have come to the Lord out of fear of punishment. I'm just not afraid of much. Talking about such things is certainly not a sales technique. But, now that I have walked with the Lord for a few years, I can see his logic. It is unassailable. Additionally, Jesus had a lot to say about Judgment, punishment, and Hell.

I would like for ANYONE to address the 2 questions I stated above from a standpoint of pure logic.

designs

Try a bowl of Stephens Frosty Miracle Flakes ..... you'll feel better

AllTimeJeff

Perry, I am going to restate my answers to your questions. I first answered them by saying, then demonstrating that there was nothing logical with the premise to begin with. You then say that your question wasn't answered. I answered it. You just don't like the answer.

Perry, here are your two questions:

1. What is intrinsically illogical about the biblical explanation about God and Suffering co-existing?

My answer to this are repasted below, just in case you ignored it the first time.

2. Please explain by what possible measure of logic you can employ to prop up your illusion that a JUST GOD will not Judge? For if God refuses to judge people, then this must mean that God is evil....having to ability to judge and refusing to do so.

You are assuming too much here. You are judging it illogical that if god refuses to judge people, that he is evil. Other then the bible, what are you relying on to make this assumption, another personal conversation you had with Jesus?

Enjoy my repeating the answers to question 1 below. If asked, I will repaste it again until you get through in your head that your premise is illogical, thus, any attempts at logically answering your question is wrong. It's like finding the logic in Lord of the Rings. It's still fiction.

Bon apetite.

Oh, the illogic of the Bible, with Seas parting, Floods happening, families through incest (Lot and his merry daughters) and the "investigation" of Sodom and Gomorrah before they were "salted" away.
And that's just Genesis and Exodus.
Yup, lots of logic.....

AND

Until someone can logically explain why God "allows" suffering and doesn't step in, I could give a rats behind about the reconciliation. But here is one thing you have stated over and over.
We are born sinful.
Thats right, that little baby is doomed unless he accepts what, in your mind Perry, is the only way to reconciliation with god. Jesus.
That baby will grow, develop all kinds of personality traits, might even be born in China, or a Muslim country, where logically, they are doomed because they won't accept Jesus.
Doomed. Baby. Born dead unless he accepts Christ. Doomed because our original parents ate a piece of fruit after a discussion of good vs evil with a snake.
Logic?
Your premise is wrong. Always has been. You fight this point because without it, you would have to back off a lot of your statements, but you can't prove logically why we are alienated from god without the illogical Genesis account. Genesis is an allegory at best. Without accepting that I am in need of reconciliation based on the 2 naked people and snake story, I have no need for your snake oil.
You refuse to see that sin is a control mechanism of religion, of which, you personally have bought. Again and again, I respect your right to view things exactly as you do for you. But to argue it for others in the manner you do, and I must object.
No logic. Premise based on fairy tales. That is what you believe in Perry.
So in view of the foregoing, why would I try to find the illogic in the reconciliation of Jesus when the whole thing is illogical?
In short, your starting line belief that we are sinners in need of reconciliation based on the eating of a fruit by 2 naked people in some garden in the middle east after being talked into it by a snake is illogical. It's all downhill from there.

designs

Naked people and snakes ....I'm liking this story tell me more Uncle Jeff as I have my morning bowl of Frosty Miracle Flakes

AllTimeJeff

Designs

Did you see Brittney Spears with the snake at the MTV awards a few years ago? It was like that, with a voiceover. ;)

designs

I'll have to check it out..............now nothing bad will happen for any Lust problems that come up will they, Britney and a snake

Perry

AK - Jeff

I agree 100% with ATJ regarding premise.

If you start the story with a fairy tale, then how do you expect people to believe it once they remove the bag from their heads? That is why I compared it to Cinderella or Santa Claus.

I just don't desire to make any sense of a book that begins with such a silly premise. I just watched Chitty-Chitty Bang-Bang with my grandkids the other night - but I don't believe the car actually flew. And since I doubt that story line, I must assume the rest of the story is also full of nonsense. The Bible is like that - a nice funny nursery rhyme about a snake, a lady and an apple.

After the movie, even my 5 year old grandson did not believe that cars fly. I hope he never believes that a talking snake seduced the entire world away from God, and that God decided punish all of mankind for it - seemingly forever.

Jeff

God and Suffering

Share this