Posts by JAVA

103

The "Ransom Sacrifice" short version.

by Norm in

jw
friends

in the christian part of the world not many of us have escaped the much hyped and published sacrifice christ supposedly made when the romans executed him.. i myself was going around for years parroting this strange concept without giving it much thought.

thinking and faith some times do not mix very well.. anyway, apparently god made a royal blunder when he created the first humans and they plunged mankind into death and despair first crack out of the box, while god stood by and watched helplessly.

then we are told that god for this reason, in his infinite wisdom took mankind for ransom for thousands of years.

JAVA

JanH,

It is true that the argument from evil which generally demolishes classic theism does not help to disprove a less-than-good deity or even a slightly incometent deity.

Yes, that's where I was going with the argument. It's doesn't take a rocket scientist to read the Bible and see many episodes of morality clearly violated by God. Indeed, if the Bible is really the "Word of God," then God is getting away with murder--a concept Bible believers skirt with various scriptures or circular arguments. You correctly point out the "evil deity" theory doesn't disprove the deity theory, however, I wasn't going there.

Finally, there is no reason to believe that such a deity, or any deity, exists. Theism exists only as a nostalgic throwback to primitive times, when people needed supernatural beliefs to understand nature. Today we should not need to believe in ghosts, fairies or deities, since there is no evidence for such things.

Jungian theory might suggest the deity concept comes from the "Collective Unconscious," but there isn't much evidence in that bowl of pudding either. However, it's useful in explaining how some notions are carried on through time. Larc has a Ph.D in this field, perhaps he has some thoughts on Jung's idea.

Maybe it's a JW-carry over, but I like the theory of an all-knowing deity. Just liking the concept doesn't make it so, and the biblical deity(ies) is not creditable (to me). Yet I come across things from time to time that's thought provoking, and feels like a spiritual read (or something of that sort). That doesn't prove anything, but it's fun exploring antique shops; walking out empty-handed isn't all bad either.

--JAVA

counting time at the Coffee Shop

103

The "Ransom Sacrifice" short version.

by Norm in

jw
friends

in the christian part of the world not many of us have escaped the much hyped and published sacrifice christ supposedly made when the romans executed him.. i myself was going around for years parroting this strange concept without giving it much thought.

thinking and faith some times do not mix very well.. anyway, apparently god made a royal blunder when he created the first humans and they plunged mankind into death and despair first crack out of the box, while god stood by and watched helplessly.

then we are told that god for this reason, in his infinite wisdom took mankind for ransom for thousands of years.

JAVA

aChristian,

We can tell our children that they are not allowed to cross the street. That does not make it wrong for us to cross the street.

If Hitler stood before a court of law for the atrocities of ~~murdering~~ killing the first born of an entire nation because he wanted to show how all-powerful he was, most of us would see that as the worst crime committed by any person. However, you're saying God can do the same thing and it's not a crime. The all-loving God can do despicable things, and it's dismissed by Christians with less than a jaywalking ticket!

A crime is never a crime if God does it because He can fix it, is the other argument. He gives life, and as the giver of life, God cannot be accused of killing or murder. I'll remind the judge living two doors from me that a mother can never be accused of killing her children because she gave them life. I'm sure he'll see the error of his ways.

However, the mother could use the argument "I can replace the kids I killed with other kids." It's a little like robbing a bank and returning the money the next day for a reduced sentence. That might work if you're God, but humans are held to a higher standard.

The argument that God can kill but it's okay because He can bring the person back to life is based on fantasy. Yes, I know scripture speaks of such things, but the fact is this; God has not demonstrated to anyone reading this post that He can do that or that He is interested in doing that. Just because someone wrote about it, and years later someone else called it a holy book, doesn't make the stuff written true. The fact is, none of us has ever witnessed someone raised from the dead. If Hilter said, "I'll resurrect the 6,000,000 people I killed in the New System a few thousand years from now"--I don't think anyone would buy his lunacy.

Bottom line Mike; I'm not trying to prove God doesn't exist, that is not my responsibility or goal in life. I'm an Agnostic, not because I don't want to believe--I'm an Agnostic because believers give me little reason to believe.

--JAVA

counting time at the Coffee Shop

14

Now Foot and Mouth Hits My Families Farm.

by Englishman in

jw
friends

i thought that maybe i would keep everyone up to date re the foot and mouth epidemic that is sweeping the uk.. my wifes brother bob has a farm in dumfries, which is just across the scotland border.

yesterday tony blair visited the area and commended the farmers for their courage in keeping going in the face of almost insurmountable odds.. this morning bob received a letter from the ministry of agriculture.

his animals are within 5 miles of an outbreak of f & m, and as such they are to be slaughtered in an effort at containment.

JAVA

Englishman,

I've been watching and reading about this calamity, and feel awful for all involved. I'm sincerely sorry for the loss your family is suffering.

--JAVA

counting time at the Coffee Shop

103

The "Ransom Sacrifice" short version.

by Norm in

jw
friends

in the christian part of the world not many of us have escaped the much hyped and published sacrifice christ supposedly made when the romans executed him.. i myself was going around for years parroting this strange concept without giving it much thought.

thinking and faith some times do not mix very well.. anyway, apparently god made a royal blunder when he created the first humans and they plunged mankind into death and despair first crack out of the box, while god stood by and watched helplessly.

then we are told that god for this reason, in his infinite wisdom took mankind for ransom for thousands of years.

JAVA

aChristian,

Luke 12:6,7. There he asked, "Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? Yet not one of them is forgotten by God. Indeed, the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Don't be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows." Again, his words here, "not one of them is forgotten by God," only indicate God's being all-knowing when it comes to sparrows, not His being all-loving towards sparrows.

You're right, it seems God shows little love for sparrows if he is the creator of sparrows and hawks. However, I think others might disagree with your interpretation of "not one of them is forgotten by God" as only meaning God is "all-knowing." When visiting someone in the hospital I often say, "I'll be thinking of you." That doesn't mean I'm all-knowing; it means I care for them, love them, and wish them well.

I do not believe the Bible teaches that God is "omini-benevolent" toward all His creations. It only teaches that God has a very great love for mankind.

Well, the biblical God has a bizarre way of showing "very great love for mankind" if you're at the wrong place at the wrong time. For example, lets say I lived in Egypt, and I was the first born to Egyptian parents when God decided to murder me for the crime of being first born. As first born, I likely had nothing to do with the political and religious happenings in that part of the world, and of course the all-knowing God knew that. God's "great love for mankind" reached beyond the front door of my parents home and murdered me as if I was food for hawks. We call that genocide today, Mike.

--JAVA

counting time at the Coffee Shop

103

The "Ransom Sacrifice" short version.

by Norm in

jw
friends

in the christian part of the world not many of us have escaped the much hyped and published sacrifice christ supposedly made when the romans executed him.. i myself was going around for years parroting this strange concept without giving it much thought.

thinking and faith some times do not mix very well.. anyway, apparently god made a royal blunder when he created the first humans and they plunged mankind into death and despair first crack out of the box, while god stood by and watched helplessly.

then we are told that god for this reason, in his infinite wisdom took mankind for ransom for thousands of years.

JAVA

aChristian,

I believe Jan's arguments are designed only to prove that the God of the Bible, who is said to be all-knowing, all-loving, and all-powerful, does not exist.

Yes, knew that when I brought up the question:

...God must be 1)all-knowing 2)all-charitable/kindness 3)allmighty in order to be God. If missing any of these characteristics, he/she can't be God. Why?

As an Agnostic, I don't claim knowing what I don't know. Limiting God to the 3 biblical definitions above creates many problems that's difficult to ignore. If "all-charitable/kindness" was removed from the Christian definition of God, then their argument would be stronger. A simple example is this:

If God created the sparrow and the hawk, it seems disingenuous suggesting God cares and remembers each fallen sparrow. As the sparrow feels the pain of being ripped apart, as it's little ones are left starving in the nest, I'm sure the sparrow finds little comfort knowing God is "all-kindness."

I could continue in detail with various illustrations, but I think you see the point. Playing scriptural gymnastics to paint the obvious in another color doesn't help the Christian concept of God. Take out the "God is all-kindness" definition, and your vision of God wouldn't go against what the eye can see.

--JAVA

counting time at the Coffee Shop

37

Isn't the tie a phallic symbol

by hippikon in

jw
friends

i seem to remember reading somewhere that the tie is a phallic symbol.

can anybody shed any light on that.

if this is so it should go the way of beards, birthdays, the cross, rock music, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.

JAVA

idaho,

The figure on the cup is a Native American bull (another phallic symbol?) of some sort. A few students gave me the cup a couple of years ago; I wonder what they were trying to say? However, I like your suggestion, that could be a picture of me when I was an elder!

--JAVA

counting time at the Coffee Shop

103

The "Ransom Sacrifice" short version.

by Norm in

jw
friends

in the christian part of the world not many of us have escaped the much hyped and published sacrifice christ supposedly made when the romans executed him.. i myself was going around for years parroting this strange concept without giving it much thought.

thinking and faith some times do not mix very well.. anyway, apparently god made a royal blunder when he created the first humans and they plunged mankind into death and despair first crack out of the box, while god stood by and watched helplessly.

then we are told that god for this reason, in his infinite wisdom took mankind for ransom for thousands of years.

JAVA

Jan,

But this should not be possible if God were omniscient, omnibenevolent, and omniponent. So, He must lack at least one of these characteristics. However, all of these characteristics are essential to God. A being is not God if it lacks one of them. Hence, God does not exist.

This is an interesting thread, and I appreciate all parties hanging in there as it goes along. The above quote more or less says God must be 1)all-knowing 2)all-charitable/kindness 3)allmighty in order to be God. If missing any of these characteristics, he/she can't be God. Why?

For example, let's say God is allmighty, and all-knowing, but doesn't give a rip about kindness. Socrates' which came first question, "Are certain actions good because God commands them, or does God command them because they are good" begs me to ask, what if God is not good/kind or is just nonbenevolent? How does that scratch Him/Her from the God for a Day theme park?

--JAVA

counting time at the Coffee Shop

37

Isn't the tie a phallic symbol

by hippikon in

jw
friends

i seem to remember reading somewhere that the tie is a phallic symbol.

can anybody shed any light on that.

if this is so it should go the way of beards, birthdays, the cross, rock music, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.

JAVA

hippikon,

Nice Big Tie

Hey, I'm just trying to keep up with Dilbert.

One of the students followed me into the office last year getting pictures for the Yearbook. I sat down at the computer and raised my coffee cup in the air as a saluting pose to the graduating class. That's the only digital picture I have, and when I saw how this thread was going with ties and beards . . . The Phallic Devil made me do it!

--JAVA

counting time at the Coffee Shop

13

Re: "You wouldn't understand it unless you...

by Simon in

jw
friends

i remember at a book study the conductor saying something about ho simple everything was and that anyone of us could easily talk for a minute about our beliefs.. everybody froze of course and was hoping he wouldn't pick them.. no one could or wanted to do it even amongst each other !.

it's a sad indictment of the 'faith' isn't it.

i have a theory that 90% of jw's could not tell you what the current beliefs were.