Religion… What do you think?

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

6044

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27951  Edited By dshipp17

Luke 3:34-38:

Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,

35 Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,

36 Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,

37 Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,

38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

Loading Video...

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

6044

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27953  Edited By dshipp17

@spareheadone:

Clearly, your representation of Psalm 37:23 isn't the intent of the Scripture and has nothing to do with God preventing someone from exercising their free will or your suggestion that God lead Adam to partake of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, especially when it was the Serpent who entered the scene and directed them to disobey God in this one request or requirement from God; God's guidance in this particular context is for a benevolent purpose, not for the destructive purposes and drastic consequences the resulted for Adam and all humanity; this is a lot more consistent with what Satan directs or tempts people to do: Psalm 37:22-24: For such as be blessed of him shall inherit the earth; and they that be cursed of him shall be cut off. The steps of a good man are ordered by the Lord: and he delighteth in his way. Though he fall, he shall not be utterly cast down: for the Lord upholdeth him with his hand. God's will is that none should perish.

“Proverbs 19:21 Many plans are in a man's heart, but the purpose of the LORD will prevail. Adam was actually being directed by God.”

This is just wrong altogether; you'd need to show that it was God rather than the Serpent who was directing Adam's actions; in the context of this Scripture, again, God isn't doing something for the shear purpose of bringing an innocent or well meaning person to their destruction. God's will is that none should perish but be saved. As you were previously told, beware of removing Scripture out of context for a purpose that is just totally inconsistent with God wanting everyone to be saved and as being all good.

“Jeremiah 10:23 I know, O LORD, that a man's way is not his own; no one who walks directs his own steps.

Adam thinks he is making plans but it is really God.”

Jeremiah 10:18-23: For thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will sling out the inhabitants of the land at this once, and will distress them, that they may find it so. Woe is me for my hurt! my wound is grievous; but I said, Truly this is a grief, and I must bear it. My tabernacle is spoiled, and all my cords are broken: my children are gone forth of me, and they are not: there is none to stretch forth my tent any more, and to set up my curtains. For the pastors are become brutish, and have not sought the Lord: therefore they shall not prosper, and all their flocks shall be scattered. Behold, the noise of the bruit is come, and a great commotion out of the north country, to make the cities of Judah desolate, and a den of dragons. O Lord, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps.

This Scripture doesn't any anyway show that God doesn't allow free nor that God would direct an innocent, upright person to their destruction, or would generally guide someone's steps to a destructive end just to fulfill a plan, particularly a plan that has no other purpose but the destruction of both innocent and guilty people, leaving some with the ability to claim that it was God who lead them to their destruction with no chance at repentance nor help toward a desire to repent; nor that it shows that God prevents certain people from being able to come to salvation; this Scripture is just simply totally out of context. This Scripture, in context, is about God deciding to execute Judgment on people who have become wicked by way of their own free will over the course of time, despite knowing what would be considered right in the eyes of God.

A reasonable gets the gist; no need to entertain the rest; Proverbs is just a list of statements; but, sometimes, the surrounding verses give context. Here, the clear error is that you're trying to place a malevolent purpose on God rather than the Serpent who clearly directed or tempted Adam to disobey.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27954  Edited By SpareHeadOne

@dshipp17:

God gives Adam a prophecy and a promise "in the day you eat of it, dying you will die"

Not "if you eat it" but "when"

Saturn and Sayin are talking about God moving David to sin against him.

You need to repent of your evil desire to hide in darkness and not embrace the truth that is right in front of you in scripture. John 3:17-21

Avatar image for king_saturn
King Saturn

223608

Forum Posts

509

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@king_saturn said:

1. 2 Samuel 24 also has GOD inciting David to go take a Census that was unlawful. How is this passage even reliable when it has GOD causing David to Sin against him ?

Help me to understand where you are coming from. Scholars in hermeneutics, say that it is not the intention of the author to say that God "made" David take a census, but that God permitted it. Do you disagree with their interpretation?

That makes no sense. Especially when you consider that it was this Sin that prompted GOD to punish Israel and nothing else that is eluded to. If GOD was angry at Israel beforehand, then there is no reason for GOD to incite David to take a Census or Satan to incite David to take a census.

Didn't God promise that he would punish Israel if they took a census and didn't follow His guidelines? I'm struggling to see the problem. Since David was already on going to take a census of his own free will, why couldn't God use that occasion to accomplish His purpose? It seems that the author is conveying God used that occasion as the means to punish Israel. Could He have done it without it? I guess, but we are not told that.

I notice you lean heavily on the 2 Samuel 24 version of the story but hardly mention how Satan incited David to take a Census in 1 Chronicles 21.

I don't understand what the observation suggests. Is there something in the text in 1 Chronicles 21 that you have mentioned that I've overlooked?

I don't know why you keep using this Wrestling analogy when it's not on topic. I will deal with your last statement though. Well, what is the Group ( Israel ) responses here ? All Israel did was go along with what David had declared them to do by taking a Census. I asked you earlier what could Israel do to avoid taking a Census and being caught guilty within this sin of David and you said nothing about it. So what exactly are we getting at here ? I still see David being the one man whose Sin caused Catastrophe for 70,000 People and it should not have been so. That's assuming GOD's character is truly merciful and has ultimate wisdom as the Bible often speaks of.

Several things here. 1) the wrestling analogy is very much on target. The vast majority of hermeneutical scholarship on the issue of God punishing nations is based on the premise that individuals and groups are different and are therefore treated differently. If it helps I can give you an IT analogy. In many programming languages there is the concept of objects (think your shopping cart at Amazon). What you add or take away from your cart only affects your cart. It is its own object that has all the attributes and can do all the things that its "class" can do. However, objects can be part of more than one "class". Think of an individual class and a nation class. Each class has different attributes. When you change the individual class it does not necessarily impact the nation class and vice versa. The object is part of both and impacted by both, but the classes are distinct and must function by the attributes and functions associated with them. Is that better.

Again, what's your take? Do you agree that nations and individuals are judged by the appropriate standards for each by God?

2. Okay, but either passage does not say that the Israelites had not done what was required of them. The only thing both passages 2 Samuel 24 and 1 Chronicles 21 are clear on is that David's sin lead to this massive disaster cause by GOD here. You can say that GOD was angry with Israel beforehand but what then is the point of inciting David to sin when GOD was well within his rights to punish Israel without the Sin of what David had done ? What would have been wrong with GOD having Gad the Prophet come to David and saying "David, the Israelites have sinned greatly against the LORD and on this night many will be smitten for their trespasses". This entire discussion dies if those words are in the Bible instead of a couple of stories of GOD killing off 70,000 People because he had David incited to take a Census.

Who can know about alternate scenarios.

3. Again, this does not make sense. It's not just the timing. It's the entire situation. What the hell sense does it make for GOD to incite David to Sin so you can punish Israel when you could punish Israel without causing David to sin?

David is making his own choices from my understanding. God did not "make" him do what he did, He permitted it. Do you think God instantly punishes individuals or groups when they do wrong? Do thieves always get caught and punished on their very first theft? Do liars always suffer immediately following their first lie? Why couldn't God use the occasion of the census to carry out his judgement?

The passages are clear David is incited to do this Sin by either GOD himself or Satan depending on which passage you believe.

Which do you believe? I think the traditional view is that Satan tempts David and David makes his own choice to conduct a census while God permits this to happen without divine interference.

Why would the Bible even include these words if not they was important to the situation ? If it was just David wanting to take a Census unlawfully then why even having anything in the Bible about GOD or Satan inciting David in this event ?

Don't know but then again I'm not an ancient Hebrew. It seems the story does serve a point, it addresses your original question - why does God judge Israel for David's sin (isn't this David's question to God). It talks about God's judging of sin but His wrath is tempered. It also focuses on David's heart toward God even when he falls short.

4. No, I am claiming it's against GOD's nature to punish thousands for the mistake of one person. Yes, GOD can cause pain or suffering to a community but to have thousands killed because David takes a Census is indeed unfair.

I could again point out that you are missing the distinction in individuals or groups, but you already know you are doing that. I could repeat the observation that the Exodus passage points out that the people had a responsibility to respond a certain way when a census was taken (so it was possible to take a census without God's instructions).

5. Well, perhaps Israel did make GOD angry, the problem is why is GOD causing David to sin here ? That's the issue the passage falls apart because it's not logical that GOD would incite David to sin. It's against GOD's nature to cause someone to Sin especially someone who believes in him like David did. The passage is fishy.

See above. On a personal note, do you think of God as unjust and the cause of your sins? David apparently didn't have that perception. But what is your perception of God?

6. What in the blue whales is you talking about ? The passage in 2 Samuel 24 is clear. It says that GOD incited David to go and take a Census of Israel and Judah. The definition of Incited is to encourage or stir up. Why is GOD encouraging David to sin by taking a Census ? That Makes No Sense.

I thought this answer addressed your questions in point 6:

https://www.gotquestions.org/David-census.html

1. Yes, I disagree with these Scholars interpretation. The passage says clearly that GOD incited David to take the Census in 2 Samuel 24 and the definition of Incited is to encourage or stir up. Now, as I said I find 2 Samuel 24 to be fishy because of a couple of reasons that I already went over and will probably speak on in later points here. It's also important to remember as well that in 1 Chronicles 21 this passage starts off by saying that it was Satan who rose up against Israel and incited David to take a Census so pick your choice, is it Satan or GOD whom is inciting.

2. Yes, GOD did say that he would punish Israel if they did not take ransom when they did a Census but neither passage in 2 Samuel 24 or 1 Chronicles 21 elude to Israel not doing what they was supposed to do here. The passage only speaks of David unlawfully taking a Census, and like I said before in 1 Chronicles 21, we do not see GOD angry with Israel until after David took the Census unlawfully and then the punishment comes. 2 Samuel 24 has GOD angry with Israel beforehand but it also has GOD inciting David to take the Census as the passage says. Again, it does not make sense for GOD to encourage David to Sin so he could punish Israel. Where else in the Bible does GOD encourage his own Believers to Sin so he could punish Israel ?

3. Yes, in 1 Chronicles 21, it never mentions that GOD was angry with Israel beforehand as well as it is Satan whom rose up against Israel and incited David to take a Census. This is very different from the beginning of 2 Samuel 24 where the passage states GOD was angry with Israel and he incited David to take a Census.

4. None of these analogies have anything to do with the point though. GOD treating Nations and Individuals different is besides the point. The question is and has been how is it just for GOD to punish Israel on the strength of someone else Sin ? GOD is perfect and just supposedly right ? How is it just to kill off thousands when GOD knows it's the commander who screwed up and not directly the community as a whole. Like I said, the passage never eludes to Israel not doing what they was supposed to do only that David's sin of unlawfully taking the Census caused all this mess. As far as your last question, obviously GOD can judge however he pleases, his character would be suspect though if this judgment is as it reads in this passage though.

5. We can because these new words I have given in this scenario if it was in 2 Samuel 24 or 1 Chronicles 21 would kill this entire discussion. It would basically be a situation of GOD punishing Israel over their own Sin which we see all through the Old Testament.

6. Neither passage in 2 Samuel 24 or 1 Chronicles 21 says that David rose up and took the Census unlawfully himself, it's either GOD or Satan who encouraged or stirred up this event which leads me to believe he was pushed into this situation. For me to believe your position, the passage would need Satan and GOD inciting David to take the Census Subtracted from the piece for it to be more plausible. GOD incited David to Sin is the problem here, for GOD to encourage or have Satan encourage David to Sin is against his Nature. The problem is not that GOD punished Israel, it's whether or not Israel was truly guilty of something here or are they being punished on the strength of what David had done.

7. I am thinking it's more along the lines of 1 Chronicles 21 as what I think probably happened. The problem is here, even if I gave you that David was just encouraged or tempted by Satan to take a Census, this passage never says that GOD was angry with Israel beforehand it actually quite plainly says that this command of David taking a Census disgusted GOD so he punished Israel. It gives clear direction that it was David's command that caused GOD to punish Israel. Now we are back at square one again.

8. Okay, but where does it say in either passage that Israel had not done what was required of them concerning the Census ? Why does GOD say in 1 Chronicles 21:7 that it was David's command that was disgusting to him and not the disobedience of Israel ? That's never mentioned in 1 Chronicles 21.

9. No I do not, but the passage in 2 Samuel 24 indicates that at least GOD is willing to encourage someone to Sin who believes in him and that does not make much sense.

10. I read through the gotquestions site on David's Census and speaks of GOD being angry with Israel because of David's sin of numbering Israel when it did not belong to him and it was not at GOD's command to do so. Again, these issues do not nullify my points. It's still going back to GOD punishing Israel by killing thousands and being angry with Israel over something that David commanded.

Avatar image for just_sayin
just_sayin

4316

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

1. Yes, I disagree with these Scholars interpretation. The passage says clearly that GOD incited David to take the Census in 2 Samuel 24 and the definition of Incited is to encourage or stir up. Now, as I said I find 2 Samuel 24 to be fishy because of a couple of reasons that I already went over and will probably speak on in later points here. It's also important to remember as well that in 1 Chronicles 21 this passage starts off by saying that it was Satan who rose up against Israel and incited David to take a Census so pick your choice, is it Satan or GOD whom is inciting.

The link I gave you in my last post, https://www.gotquestions.org/David-census.html,suggests that the hebrew translation is not so clear. How one passage could say Satan and another God has been explained - at least as the traditional Christian perspective on it goes. Do you disagree with Old Testament scholarship on this point?

2. Yes, GOD did say that he would punish Israel if they did not take ransom when they did a Census but neither passage in 2 Samuel 24 or 1 Chronicles 21 elude to Israel not doing what they was supposed to do here.

Nor does it say they fulfilled the law, hower Joab did predict that Israel would sin if the census was taken.

The passage only speaks of David unlawfully taking a Census, and like I said before in 1 Chronicles 21, we do not see GOD angry with Israel until after David took the Census unlawfully and then the punishment comes. 2 Samuel 24 has GOD angry with Israel beforehand but it also has GOD inciting David to take the Census as the passage says. Again, it does not make sense for GOD to encourage David to Sin so he could punish Israel. Where else in the Bible does GOD encourage his own Believers to Sin so he could punish Israel ?

There are two accounts. I don't see that they are necessarily in conflict. Not mentioning that God was already angry with Israel in one account, doesn't seem to contradict the other account. Further, as I mentioned above, the hebrew for who "incites" Israel is debatable (see https://www.gotquestions.org/David-census.html).

3. Yes, in 1 Chronicles 21, it never mentions that GOD was angry with Israel beforehand as well as it is Satan whom rose up against Israel and incited David to take a Census. This is very different from the beginning of 2 Samuel 24 where the passage states GOD was angry with Israel and he incited David to take a Census.

Different, but not exclusionary or necessarily contradictory.

4. None of these analogies have anything to do with the point though. GOD treating Nations and Individuals different is besides the point. The question is and has been how is it just for GOD to punish Israel on the strength of someone else Sin ?

God treating individuals and Nations by their respective natures, is really the MAIN point in addressing your initial question on how God could punish Israel for David's sin. God punished Israel for her collective part in the taking of a census and doing so according to the law. You see that as peripheral, but I see it as the crux of the issue.

GOD is perfect and just supposedly right ? How is it just to kill off thousands when GOD knows it's the commander who screwed up and not directly the community as a whole. Like I said, the passage never eludes to Israel not doing what they was supposed to do only that David's sin of unlawfully taking the Census caused all this mess. As far as your last question, obviously GOD can judge however he pleases, his character would be suspect though if this judgment is as it reads in this passage though.

See above ^.

5. We can because these new words I have given in this scenario if it was in 2 Samuel 24 or 1 Chronicles 21 would kill this entire discussion. It would basically be a situation of GOD punishing Israel over their own Sin which we see all through the Old Testament.

So the confusion is God's fault? And the biblical scholars near unanimous voice on the appropriate interpretation is wrong?!

6. Neither passage in 2 Samuel 24 or 1 Chronicles 21 says that David rose up and took the Census unlawfully himself, it's either GOD or Satan who encouraged or stirred up this event which leads me to believe he was pushed into this situation.

This is speculation.

For me to believe your position,

My position? Thanks for the compliment, but it doesn't come from me. It's a very prominent understanding of the passages that has been discussed for literally thousands of years.

the passage would need Satan and GOD inciting David to take the Census Subtracted from the piece for it to be more plausible. GOD incited David to Sin is the problem here, for GOD to encourage or have Satan encourage David to Sin is against his Nature. The problem is not that GOD punished Israel, it's whether or not Israel was truly guilty of something here or are they being punished on the strength of what David had done.

I'm curious of why you think the author included the words and why you believe an amanuensis did not alter the scripts if it was problematic?

7. I am thinking it's more along the lines of 1 Chronicles 21 as what I think probably happened. The problem is here, even if I gave you that David was just encouraged or tempted by Satan to take a Census, this passage never says that GOD was angry with Israel beforehand it actually quite plainly says that this command of David taking a Census disgusted GOD so he punished Israel. It gives clear direction that it was David's command that caused GOD to punish Israel. Now we are back at square one again.

Both books, while starting in different places, would have been known to the people, further even other accounts were known of David's life. Seems odd, if this was such a contradiction, that the people themselves did not think so.

See above ^.

8. Okay, but where does it say in either passage that Israel had not done what was required of them concerning the Census ? Why does GOD say in 1 Chronicles 21:7 that it was David's command that was disgusting to him and not the disobedience of Israel ? That's never mentioned in 1 Chronicles 21.

See above ^.

9. No I do not, but the passage in 2 Samuel 24 indicates that at least GOD is willing to encourage someone to Sin who believes in him and that does not make much sense.

Do you believe God made David sin? Do you think God controlled David's thoughts and forced him to make the decision. I've avoided free will because we have talked in the past about it. But I see this as an example of David exercising His free will and God permitting the consequences of that to play out.

10. I read through the gotquestions site on David's Census and speaks of GOD being angry with Israel because of David's sin of numbering Israel when it did not belong to him and it was not at GOD's command to do so. Again, these issues do not nullify my points. It's still going back to GOD punishing Israel by killing thousands and being angry with Israel over something that David commanded.

I do think that the distinction in how God judges Nations and individuals has a large part to do with the conflict you see. I respect your right to disagree though. I hope you find your answers.

Avatar image for king_saturn
King Saturn

223608

Forum Posts

509

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@king_saturn said:

1. Yes, I disagree with these Scholars interpretation. The passage says clearly that GOD incited David to take the Census in 2 Samuel 24 and the definition of Incited is to encourage or stir up. Now, as I said I find 2 Samuel 24 to be fishy because of a couple of reasons that I already went over and will probably speak on in later points here. It's also important to remember as well that in 1 Chronicles 21 this passage starts off by saying that it was Satan who rose up against Israel and incited David to take a Census so pick your choice, is it Satan or GOD whom is inciting.

The link I gave you in my last post, https://www.gotquestions.org/David-census.html,suggests that the hebrew translation is not so clear. How one passage could say Satan and another God has been explained - at least as the traditional Christian perspective on it goes. Do you disagree with Old Testament scholarship on this point?

2. Yes, GOD did say that he would punish Israel if they did not take ransom when they did a Census but neither passage in 2 Samuel 24 or 1 Chronicles 21 elude to Israel not doing what they was supposed to do here.

Nor does it say they fulfilled the law, hower Joab did predict that Israel would sin if the census was taken.

The passage only speaks of David unlawfully taking a Census, and like I said before in 1 Chronicles 21, we do not see GOD angry with Israel until after David took the Census unlawfully and then the punishment comes. 2 Samuel 24 has GOD angry with Israel beforehand but it also has GOD inciting David to take the Census as the passage says. Again, it does not make sense for GOD to encourage David to Sin so he could punish Israel. Where else in the Bible does GOD encourage his own Believers to Sin so he could punish Israel ?

There are two accounts. I don't see that they are necessarily in conflict. Not mentioning that God was already angry with Israel in one account, doesn't seem to contradict the other account. Further, as I mentioned above, the hebrew for who "incites" Israel is debatable (see https://www.gotquestions.org/David-census.html).

3. Yes, in 1 Chronicles 21, it never mentions that GOD was angry with Israel beforehand as well as it is Satan whom rose up against Israel and incited David to take a Census. This is very different from the beginning of 2 Samuel 24 where the passage states GOD was angry with Israel and he incited David to take a Census.

Different, but not exclusionary or necessarily contradictory.

4. None of these analogies have anything to do with the point though. GOD treating Nations and Individuals different is besides the point. The question is and has been how is it just for GOD to punish Israel on the strength of someone else Sin ?

God treating individuals and Nations by their respective natures, is really the MAIN point in addressing your initial question on how God could punish Israel for David's sin. God punished Israel for her collective part in the taking of a census and doing so according to the law. You see that as peripheral, but I see it as the crux of the issue.

GOD is perfect and just supposedly right ? How is it just to kill off thousands when GOD knows it's the commander who screwed up and not directly the community as a whole. Like I said, the passage never eludes to Israel not doing what they was supposed to do only that David's sin of unlawfully taking the Census caused all this mess. As far as your last question, obviously GOD can judge however he pleases, his character would be suspect though if this judgment is as it reads in this passage though.

See above ^.

5. We can because these new words I have given in this scenario if it was in 2 Samuel 24 or 1 Chronicles 21 would kill this entire discussion. It would basically be a situation of GOD punishing Israel over their own Sin which we see all through the Old Testament.

So the confusion is God's fault? And the biblical scholars near unanimous voice on the appropriate interpretation is wrong?!

6. Neither passage in 2 Samuel 24 or 1 Chronicles 21 says that David rose up and took the Census unlawfully himself, it's either GOD or Satan who encouraged or stirred up this event which leads me to believe he was pushed into this situation.

This is speculation.

For me to believe your position,

My position? Thanks for the compliment, but it doesn't come from me. It's a very prominent understanding of the passages that has been discussed for literally thousands of years.

the passage would need Satan and GOD inciting David to take the Census Subtracted from the piece for it to be more plausible. GOD incited David to Sin is the problem here, for GOD to encourage or have Satan encourage David to Sin is against his Nature. The problem is not that GOD punished Israel, it's whether or not Israel was truly guilty of something here or are they being punished on the strength of what David had done.

I'm curious of why you think the author included the words and why you believe an amanuensis did not alter the scripts if it was problematic?

7. I am thinking it's more along the lines of 1 Chronicles 21 as what I think probably happened. The problem is here, even if I gave you that David was just encouraged or tempted by Satan to take a Census, this passage never says that GOD was angry with Israel beforehand it actually quite plainly says that this command of David taking a Census disgusted GOD so he punished Israel. It gives clear direction that it was David's command that caused GOD to punish Israel. Now we are back at square one again.

Both books, while starting in different places, would have been known to the people, further even other accounts were known of David's life. Seems odd, if this was such a contradiction, that the people themselves did not think so.

See above ^.

8. Okay, but where does it say in either passage that Israel had not done what was required of them concerning the Census ? Why does GOD say in 1 Chronicles 21:7 that it was David's command that was disgusting to him and not the disobedience of Israel ? That's never mentioned in 1 Chronicles 21.

See above ^.

9. No I do not, but the passage in 2 Samuel 24 indicates that at least GOD is willing to encourage someone to Sin who believes in him and that does not make much sense.

Do you believe God made David sin? Do you think God controlled David's thoughts and forced him to make the decision. I've avoided free will because we have talked in the past about it. But I see this as an example of David exercising His free will and God permitting the consequences of that to play out.

10. I read through the gotquestions site on David's Census and speaks of GOD being angry with Israel because of David's sin of numbering Israel when it did not belong to him and it was not at GOD's command to do so. Again, these issues do not nullify my points. It's still going back to GOD punishing Israel by killing thousands and being angry with Israel over something that David commanded.

I do think that the distinction in how God judges Nations and individuals has a large part to do with the conflict you see. I respect your right to disagree though. I hope you find your answers.

1. As I stated, I believe 1 Chronicles 21 is the more accurate position. Hence, why I have quoted 1 Chronicles 21:7 quite a bit here to make my point of how GOD punished Israel on the strength of what David had done. Again, yes I disagree with the Scholars, if the Bible is supposedly the Word of GOD then it should mean what it says, Otherwise, you would have an issue actually attaining how this can be GOD's inspired word if it's flawed or not direct in it's dialogue.

2. The passages say that Joab said that David's sin would cause Israel to be stricken with Guilt. It does not say that Israel the nation would sin. I have read this passage hundreds of times in both books and never saw where it says Israel itself would sin, only that David's command would cause Israel to be stricken with guilt because of his actions.

3. Okay, lets say GOD used Satan to incite David to sin by taking a Census as you mentioned before. If GOD is using Satan, then it's GOD's will to have David sin. Otherwise, why is GOD using Satan to entice David to sin ? Still goes back to my original point.

4. No, I am saying that the passage does not actually say that GOD punished Israel for their collective part in taking the Census but you want to know what the passage does say ? 1 Chronicles 21:6-7 "But Joab did not include Levi and Benjamin in the numbering, because the King's command was repulsive to him. This command was also evil in the sight of the LORD so he punished Israel". Now, no where in that passage does it say that GOD punish Israel for their sins but here he clearly says he punished Israel for David's unlawful command. I mean I can not make this any plain than it is.

5. Well who inspired these men to write the Bible ? It was GOD and we have two books in the Bible that says GOD incited David and the other says Satan incited David. Yes, I can see how it can create confusion. Maybe the scholars are wrong. There was a lot of great NFL analysts who thought Lamar Jackson would not make a Great Quarterback in the NFL. They seem to be eating crow right now.

6. What is speculation ? Both passages say that David was incited by GOD or Satan. There is no speculation here. David was encourage by one of these Supernatural entities to take a Census or maybe it was done by both.

7. Okay, but what is your point here ? What contradiction are you speaking of ?

9. No, I do not. I stated before that I thought 2 Samuel 24 was fishy in the way in starts off. I think 1 Chronicles 21 is more direct and accurate as this was a play from Satan that moved to have David take the Census and GOD was disgusted with David's decision and then punished Israel. That's what I think was the course of events.

10. Well for 2 Samuel 24, I am not sure why it was attributed to GOD as the one who encouraged David to Sin. I could see if GOD was angry with Israel beforehand and punished Israel but it makes no sense for GOD to use David's sin as a mechanism to hurt the Israelites. 1 Chronicles 21 however seems more plausible and the words there seem very much needed. Uh Oh, I think I mixed up some of the points.

11. Alrighty Then.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27958  Edited By SpareHeadOne

Im glad we all agree that Pantheism is the correct way to view reality.

When we realise that God is the pedophilic rapist and murderer and that God is the 5 year old victim. We can no longer point fingers at God. When we realise that we are God we can take a good look at our selves and say "what am I doing to make God a better person?"

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

6044

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27959  Edited By dshipp17

Luke 5:1-26:

And it came to pass, that, as the people pressed upon him to hear the word of God, he stood by the lake of Gennesaret,

2 And saw two ships standing by the lake: but the fishermen were gone out of them, and were washing their nets.

3 And he entered into one of the ships, which was Simon's, and prayed him that he would thrust out a little from the land. And he sat down, and taught the people out of the ship.

4 Now when he had left speaking, he said unto Simon, Launch out into the deep, and let down your nets for a draught.

5 And Simon answering said unto him, Master, we have toiled all the night, and have taken nothing: nevertheless at thy word I will let down the net.

6 And when they had this done, they inclosed a great multitude of fishes: and their net brake.

7 And they beckoned unto their partners, which were in the other ship, that they should come and help them. And they came, and filled both the ships, so that they began to sink.

8 When Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus' knees, saying, Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord.

9 For he was astonished, and all that were with him, at the draught of the fishes which they had taken:

10 And so was also James, and John, the sons of Zebedee, which were partners with Simon. And Jesus said unto Simon, Fear not; from henceforth thou shalt catch men.

11 And when they had brought their ships to land, they forsook all, and followed him.

12 And it came to pass, when he was in a certain city, behold a man full of leprosy: who seeing Jesus fell on his face, and besought him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean.

13 And he put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will: be thou clean. And immediately the leprosy departed from him.

14 And he charged him to tell no man: but go, and shew thyself to the priest, and offer for thy cleansing, according as Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them.

15 But so much the more went there a fame abroad of him: and great multitudes came together to hear, and to be healed by him of their infirmities.

16 And he withdrew himself into the wilderness, and prayed.

17 And it came to pass on a certain day, as he was teaching, that there were Pharisees and doctors of the law sitting by, which were come out of every town of Galilee, and Judaea, and Jerusalem: and the power of the Lord was present to heal them.

18 And, behold, men brought in a bed a man which was taken with a palsy: and they sought means to bring him in, and to lay him before him.

19 And when they could not find by what way they might bring him in because of the multitude, they went upon the housetop, and let him down through the tiling with his couch into the midst before Jesus.

20 And when he saw their faith, he said unto him, Man, thy sins are forgiven thee.

21 And the scribes and the Pharisees began to reason, saying, Who is this which speaketh blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone?

22 But when Jesus perceived their thoughts, he answering said unto them, What reason ye in your hearts?

23 Whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Rise up and walk?

24 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power upon earth to forgive sins, (he said unto the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy couch, and go into thine house.

25 And immediately he rose up before them, and took up that whereon he lay, and departed to his own house, glorifying God.

26 And they were all amazed, and they glorified God, and were filled with fear, saying, We have seen strange things to day.

Loading Video...
Loading Video...

Avatar image for iron_tiger
Iron_Tiger

2307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

God still doesn't exist.

Avatar image for jonjizz
jonjizz

1849

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

No Caption Provided

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@jonjizz:

Ive been going through our previous arguments and i finally see where the problem is. Im sorry it took me so long to swallow my pride but after this i hope you will accept me as slightly better than an idiot. So the problem is basically that you are not very bright and you are often wrong about most things. Hopefully this clears things up between us and we can have many interesting chats about your moronic thoughts.

Love and Respect

SpareHeadOne.

Avatar image for rajjarsalt
RajjarsAlt

1921

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Yahweh's official kill count didn't even start with men smh.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@rajjarsalt:

Are you referring to the skins he gave Adam to wear?

Avatar image for rajjarsalt
RajjarsAlt

1921

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27966  Edited By RajjarsAlt

@spareheadone said:

@rajjarsalt:

Are you referring to the skins he gave Adam to wear?

Nah. Note that I referred to him as Yahweh, not YHWH. So this is not intrinsic to the Garden's affairs.

I'm Hindu btw. Though I usually am objective when I look at the records of the divine.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@rajjarsalt:

Excellent

I am very Hindu in my thinking and the Vedas reveal that the first on his hit list was himself. Is that what you mean?

Avatar image for rajjarsalt
RajjarsAlt

1921

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@rajjarsalt:

Excellent

I am very Hindu in my thinking and the Vedas reveal that the first on his hit list was himself. Is that what you mean?

Well, I was being exclusive to the Fertile Cresent when I said that. But no, not the Purusha, but rather the storm-god Yahweh before he became supreme (prefix-EL, EL-suffix, take your pick). First he was one of many, and then supreme among all. There's a correlation between that and the actual peoples in how they change their worshiping forms. It opens up all sorts of stuff.

Though your point on Purusha is nonetheless mindblowing, for I was merely talking in jest, despite the serious nature of my points.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@rajjarsalt:

Well i hope you can stick around a while and teach us some of that stuff. We dont get to hear enough from that point of view.

Avatar image for king_saturn
King Saturn

223608

Forum Posts

509

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I am curious as to why The Almighty has allowed so many different aspects of belief about himself to persist in the Earth ? What is the point to want to have the world know and love you for who you are when there are so many different variations to the matter ? I mean if Islam is true, then everyone else is doomed for not respect The Almighty's Prophet Muhammad and honoring the full teachings of what would be. If Chrisitianity is true, then everyone else is doomed for not really respecting and believing in Yeshua / Jesus. If Jewish Theology is true, then everyone else is doomed for Blasphemy or lack their of in belief in GOD as both Yeshua and Muhammad would not be the proposed Messiah and those whom do believe in them would be lifting them up as almost GODs. Then you have Buddhism, Hinduism, not as familiar with those religious systems but what if they are the right ones and everything else is Bullcrap ?

How the Heck did The Almighty allow all this to be if he really wants us to know who he really is ? I mean cause all this can not be correct at the same time... IMO at least.

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

6044

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@spareheadone said:

@rajjarsalt:

Are you referring to the skins he gave Adam to wear?

Nah. Note that I referred to him as Yahweh, not YHWH. So this is not intrinsic to the Garden's affairs.

I'm Hindu btw. Though I usually am objective when I look at the records of the divine.

Curious; could you explain more about this or describe it? What was the situation called?

Avatar image for rajjarsalt
RajjarsAlt

1921

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17 said:
@rajjarsalt said:
@spareheadone said:

@rajjarsalt:

Are you referring to the skins he gave Adam to wear?

Nah. Note that I referred to him as Yahweh, not YHWH. So this is not intrinsic to the Garden's affairs.

I'm Hindu btw. Though I usually am objective when I look at the records of the divine.

Curious; could you explain more about this or describe it? What was the situation called?

From the descriptions and glories given to him, Yahweh seemed to be the archetypal alpha-chad enforcer of the Elohim. Pretty good at fighting, casting down gods, maybe Leviathans, etc. But whatever pathway connects the god of the storm to He of the Supreme, I can't see it all that transition as a bloodless conflict. Even Zeus's ascension was full of turmoil. It's vague at parts, but it seems to me that the Abrahamic God did at one point in time have the proverbial skeletons in his closet.

There's a lot of stuff, but it's deep Canaanite stuff.

Avatar image for rajjarsalt
RajjarsAlt

1921

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I am curious as to why The Almighty has allowed so many different aspects of belief about himself to persist in the Earth ? What is the point to want to have the world know and love you for who you are when there are so many different variations to the matter ? I mean if Islam is true, then everyone else is doomed for not respect The Almighty's Prophet Muhammad and honoring the full teachings of what would be. If Chrisitianity is true, then everyone else is doomed for not really respecting and believing in Yeshua / Jesus. If Jewish Theology is true, then everyone else is doomed for Blasphemy or lack their of in belief in GOD as both Yeshua and Muhammad would not be the proposed Messiah and those whom do believe in them would be lifting them up as almost GODs. Then you have Buddhism, Hinduism, not as familiar with those religious systems but what if they are the right ones and everything else is Bullcrap ?

How the Heck did The Almighty allow all this to be if he really wants us to know who he really is ? I mean cause all this can not be correct at the same time... IMO at least.

I think people's perceptions of what they think of the Almighty are shaped by culture and other contexts. Supposing the existence of the Almighty, perhaps he's such a complex being in that these perceptions are given significance. For one so powerful as He, perception practically is reality. Perhaps a multifaceted approach is best, considering the stigma and division intrinisc to our species.

As far as theology goes, any religious doctrine that had a netherworld worth its fire and brimstone was implemented for order, not for humanity to get closer to the immaterial. Sure, we got the Bhagavad Gita advocating elevated Krishna consciousness, but I defer to the religions that don't damn others for being external to them.

We also gotta consider that all this stuff was shaped by men and women who were as flawed and more flawed than we are/will be. It would take multiple leaps of faith to ensure the truth value of said texts.

Or there might be pantheism. Or the gods may be some Assasin Creed type Isu/time travelers/extradimensionals. I mean, the Isu already exist in our world - we embody them when relatively compared to the status and faculties every animal under our power.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@king_saturn:

I walk the line of commonality through all these religions. We all have the same symbols and archetypes. We all have the same conscience. We all need a little help.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@rajjarsalt:

Have you studied into the deep Canaanite stuff?

Avatar image for jonjizz
jonjizz

1849

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27976  Edited By jonjizz

@spareheadone: no sorry, you don't really qualify to hold a meaningful conversation with anyone who's either honest or intelligent.

your lack of critical thinking will inevitably prevent you from being objective, and your lack of seriousness will make all further efforts in explaining your mistakes... futile.

given that, even now, i would just be bullying you... and i don't wanna indulge in it for too long, however fun, i feel that's beneath me.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27977  Edited By SpareHeadOne

@jonjizz:

But you love to make fun of us religious people

No Caption Provided

You truly are the Dshipp of Atheists

Avatar image for king_saturn
King Saturn

223608

Forum Posts

509

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@king_saturn said:

I am curious as to why The Almighty has allowed so many different aspects of belief about himself to persist in the Earth ? What is the point to want to have the world know and love you for who you are when there are so many different variations to the matter ? I mean if Islam is true, then everyone else is doomed for not respect The Almighty's Prophet Muhammad and honoring the full teachings of what would be. If Chrisitianity is true, then everyone else is doomed for not really respecting and believing in Yeshua / Jesus. If Jewish Theology is true, then everyone else is doomed for Blasphemy or lack their of in belief in GOD as both Yeshua and Muhammad would not be the proposed Messiah and those whom do believe in them would be lifting them up as almost GODs. Then you have Buddhism, Hinduism, not as familiar with those religious systems but what if they are the right ones and everything else is Bullcrap ?

How the Heck did The Almighty allow all this to be if he really wants us to know who he really is ? I mean cause all this can not be correct at the same time... IMO at least.

I think people's perceptions of what they think of the Almighty are shaped by culture and other contexts. Supposing the existence of the Almighty, perhaps he's such a complex being in that these perceptions are given significance. For one so powerful as He, perception practically is reality. Perhaps a multifaceted approach is best, considering the stigma and division intrinisc to our species.

As far as theology goes, any religious doctrine that had a netherworld worth its fire and brimstone was implemented for order, not for humanity to get closer to the immaterial. Sure, we got the Bhagavad Gita advocating elevated Krishna consciousness, but I defer to the religions that don't damn others for being external to them.

We also gotta consider that all this stuff was shaped by men and women who were as flawed and more flawed than we are/will be. It would take multiple leaps of faith to ensure the truth value of said texts.

Or there might be pantheism. Or the gods may be some Assasin Creed type Isu/time travelers/extradimensionals. I mean, the Isu already exist in our world - we embody them when relatively compared to the status and faculties every animal under our power.

1. Why does The Almighty want his perception of him to be shaped by different cultures and contexts when this can create more confusion than clarity ? I get your second line, but is GOD okay with his existence being somewhat distorted by so many various stories about how Good he is and how Bad he is ? Is a multifaceted approach best when Humans are already flawed though ? I mean this again can create more confusion.

2. Alrighty then

3. True, but that goes back to the point of why would GOD want his existence to be shaped by flawed creatures when he could do it himself. Especially considering humans are flawed.

4. Pantheism is Interesting, GOD as a Time Traveler or Extra Dimensional being is something else. I mean if that's the case then it would explain why things are so complicated on Earth concerning Theology as these Extra Dimensional Beings would not necessarily be concerned directly with Sound Direct Doctrine instead concerned only with communicating with Humanoids as they please.

Avatar image for king_saturn
King Saturn

223608

Forum Posts

509

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@king_saturn:

I walk the line of commonality through all these religions. We all have the same symbols and archetypes. We all have the same conscience. We all need a little help.

I think at the base there is some commonality between these different religions. The problem is the details. It's the details that people get hurt and even killed over. Also, the details could be paramount to the situation assuming that The Almighty really considers them necessary for Enlightenment or Salvation.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@king_saturn: said

I think at the base there is some commonality between these different religions. The problem is the details. It's the details that people get hurt and even killed over. Also, the details could be paramount to the situation assuming that The Almighty really considers them necessary for Enlightenment or Salvation.

The details arent my problem and they dont have to be yours

We dont know what The Almighty considers important.

We do know what is important to all of us. I suggest that what is at base important to every human psyche is the very same as what is important to The Almighty.

Avatar image for king_saturn
King Saturn

223608

Forum Posts

509

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@king_saturn: said

I think at the base there is some commonality between these different religions. The problem is the details. It's the details that people get hurt and even killed over. Also, the details could be paramount to the situation assuming that The Almighty really considers them necessary for Enlightenment or Salvation.

The details arent my problem and they dont have to be yours

We dont know what The Almighty considers important.

We do know what is important to all of us. I suggest that what is at base important to every human psyche is the very same as what is important to The Almighty.

The details could lead to problems though via external forces. They have too many times in this world.

Correct, that's what makes it even more problematic.

Well, I would hope that what is important to all of us is all what The Almighty sees as important. Otherwise, there is big trouble on the way.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@king_saturn:

The details could lead to problems though via external forces. They have too many times in this world.

True. And thats evidence that details are in opposition to the needs of the human psyche.

Correct, that's what makes it even more problematic.

Yep. God is just a necessary concept.

Well, I would hope that what is important to all of us is all what The Almighty sees as important. Otherwise, there is big trouble on the way.

If God isnt playing fair, well i guess thats too bad.

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

6044

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27983  Edited By dshipp17

@rajjarsalt said:
@dshipp17 said:
@rajjarsalt said:
@spareheadone said:

@rajjarsalt:

Are you referring to the skins he gave Adam to wear?

Nah. Note that I referred to him as Yahweh, not YHWH. So this is not intrinsic to the Garden's affairs.

I'm Hindu btw. Though I usually am objective when I look at the records of the divine.

Curious; could you explain more about this or describe it? What was the situation called?

From the descriptions and glories given to him, Yahweh seemed to be the archetypal alpha-chad enforcer of the Elohim. Pretty good at fighting, casting down gods, maybe Leviathans, etc. But whatever pathway connects the god of the storm to He of the Supreme, I can't see it all that transition as a bloodless conflict. Even Zeus's ascension was full of turmoil. It's vague at parts, but it seems to me that the Abrahamic God did at one point in time have the proverbial skeletons in his closet.

There's a lot of stuff, but it's deep Canaanite stuff.

I had to go somewhere; I was thinking that Elohim was a place; did it say anything about a location and perhaps a queen god (or even just a female god) who sacrificed herself for someone? A queen or female that is known from Canaanite to Hindu? Or, gave up some or all her power or was the power restored after the sequence? Just before this happened, there was probably any earlier war between the gods, where gods were being killed.

Avatar image for jonjizz
jonjizz

1849

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27984  Edited By jonjizz

@spareheadone said:

@jonjizz:

But you love to make fun of us religious people

No Caption Provided

You truly are the Dshipp of Atheists

oh, i respect that you put some effort into your analysis and for once i somewhat agree with your point... as in: dshipp is completely wrong, and i'm completely right.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@jonjizz:

Iron Tiger and King Saturn are the most correct in my opinion.

Avatar image for jonjizz
jonjizz

1849

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27986  Edited By jonjizz

@spareheadone: there's only one truth in the universe and you either try to grasp it with every tool at your disposal, or fail to even rise up to the challenge.

that's why agnosticism and deism are a philosophical fail and the death of intellectual inquiry.

Avatar image for rajjarsalt
RajjarsAlt

1921

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17 said:
@rajjarsalt said:
@dshipp17 said:
@rajjarsalt said:
@spareheadone said:

@rajjarsalt:

Are you referring to the skins he gave Adam to wear?

Nah. Note that I referred to him as Yahweh, not YHWH. So this is not intrinsic to the Garden's affairs.

I'm Hindu btw. Though I usually am objective when I look at the records of the divine.

Curious; could you explain more about this or describe it? What was the situation called?

From the descriptions and glories given to him, Yahweh seemed to be the archetypal alpha-chad enforcer of the Elohim. Pretty good at fighting, casting down gods, maybe Leviathans, etc. But whatever pathway connects the god of the storm to He of the Supreme, I can't see it all that transition as a bloodless conflict. Even Zeus's ascension was full of turmoil. It's vague at parts, but it seems to me that the Abrahamic God did at one point in time have the proverbial skeletons in his closet.

There's a lot of stuff, but it's deep Canaanite stuff.

I had to go somewhere; I was thinking that Elohim was a place; did it say anything about a location and perhaps a queen god (or even just a female god) who sacrificed herself for someone? A queen or female that is known from Canaanite to Hindu? Or, gave up some or all her power or was the power restored after the sequence? Just before this happened, there was probably any earlier war between the gods, where gods were being killed.

Elohim is a plural for the El, the God. El/Adonai/Shaddai and all the others are names for the creator god, and Yahweh was totally alluding to them when he remarked about Adam eating out of the tree of knowlege when he was talking in Genesis 3:22. Specifically it's the Canaanite pantheon, children of El, etc.

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

6044

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17 said:
@rajjarsalt said:
@dshipp17 said:
@rajjarsalt said:
@spareheadone said:

@rajjarsalt:

Are you referring to the skins he gave Adam to wear?

Nah. Note that I referred to him as Yahweh, not YHWH. So this is not intrinsic to the Garden's affairs.

I'm Hindu btw. Though I usually am objective when I look at the records of the divine.

Curious; could you explain more about this or describe it? What was the situation called?

From the descriptions and glories given to him, Yahweh seemed to be the archetypal alpha-chad enforcer of the Elohim. Pretty good at fighting, casting down gods, maybe Leviathans, etc. But whatever pathway connects the god of the storm to He of the Supreme, I can't see it all that transition as a bloodless conflict. Even Zeus's ascension was full of turmoil. It's vague at parts, but it seems to me that the Abrahamic God did at one point in time have the proverbial skeletons in his closet.

There's a lot of stuff, but it's deep Canaanite stuff.

I had to go somewhere; I was thinking that Elohim was a place; did it say anything about a location and perhaps a queen god (or even just a female god) who sacrificed herself for someone? A queen or female that is known from Canaanite to Hindu? Or, gave up some or all her power or was the power restored after the sequence? Just before this happened, there was probably any earlier war between the gods, where gods were being killed.

Elohim is a plural for the El, the God. El/Adonai/Shaddai and all the others are names for the creator god, and Yahweh was totally alluding to them when he remarked about Adam eating out of the tree of knowlege when he was talking in Genesis 3:22. Specifically it's the Canaanite pantheon, children of El, etc.

Sure, Elohim is one of God's names, but, what about the other parts of my question from within the Hindu and Cananite religions?

Did it say anything about a location and perhaps a queen god (or even just a female god) who sacrificed herself for someone? A queen or female that is known from Canaanite to Hindu? Or, gave up some or all her power or was the power restored after the sequence? Just before this happened, there was probably any earlier war between the gods, where gods were being killed.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27989  Edited By SpareHeadOne

@jonjizz:

Monism is just a philosophy that you take. It is not necessarily true. Maybe pluralism is the true philosophy.

Avatar image for jonjizz
jonjizz

1849

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27990  Edited By jonjizz

@spareheadone: you misunderstand, i wasn't talking about monism at all, just the actual truth of things.

the truth is in the actual state of the universe, so there is only one truth in this sense.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@jonjizz:

There could be two actual truths of things and they could coexist equally.

Probably best to give an example.

Avatar image for jonjizz
jonjizz

1849

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27992  Edited By jonjizz

@spareheadone: no, there's only one truth of things if you can use basic logic

if you see two or more truths you're drunk

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@jonjizz:

Well you are using Monist philosophy to say that.

You are showing your fundamentalism by not accepting other possibilities and by claiming that your position equals logic.

What would be an example of the one truth of the state of the universe?

Avatar image for jonjizz
jonjizz

1849

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27994  Edited By jonjizz

@spareheadone: of course i don't accept other possibilities when they don't make sense.

example: donald trump is the elected president of the us, this is the truth, and it's only one.

i'm not familiar with monism but my argument has nothing to do with that

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@jonjizz:

Donald Trump is really just subatomic particles, waves and fields. Everything else is just conceptual.

And concepts are not real.

If concepts are not real then Donald Trump is not really the elected president.

Avatar image for jonjizz
jonjizz

1849

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27996  Edited By jonjizz

@spareheadone: silly and incorrect parody of materialism/physicalism, regardless of what he's made of, the current president is "donald trump", who exists physically in the universe... not only as a concept, but in the external reality, as part of our universe.

also, concepts and thoughts exist physically in our brain too, although obviously they're not part of the external reality so they're usually omitted out of convenience, but they're still part of the truth regarding the state of the universe, which includes you, your brain, and even everything you've ever imagined.

the truth is one and one only, this is easy to realise, so your level of awareness is way too low.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@jonjizz:

Well I'm pleased to see that you now believe that thoughts and concepts are real. You've graduated! Well done.

Pluralism would simply say that Donald Trump is elected President but also he is other things at the same time, a father being one thing. So that's two truths.

Each truth is One so I see what you mean.

Therefore agnostics and deists are far superior to atheists.

Avatar image for jonjizz
jonjizz

1849

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27998  Edited By jonjizz

@spareheadone: thoughts and concepts are real in your head only... they're not part of the external reality, which is what i was fruitlessly trying to get inside that thick skull of yours in the past, quite literally, if you will.

but this is clearly all going over your head, as you're embarrassing yourself once more... pathetic intellect smh

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@jonjizz:

You don't have to hide the fact that you've learned something from me.

Don't make me quote your past dumbness.

Avatar image for jonjizz
jonjizz

1849

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28000  Edited By jonjizz

@spareheadone: is that so? go ahead then, show me what you got...