Merry Christmas

[jaybird18c 4]

2 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

I did not say I was without fault. I said I am not fallen.

If you were not fallen, you would be without fault.

[JoeWeber 2,347]

8 minutes ago, jaybird18c said:

If you were not fallen, you would be without fault.

Whatever. Unless one believes that nonsense there is no fallen. 

[gowlerk 1,956]

7 minutes ago, jaybird18c said:

If you were not fallen, you would be without fault.

That is according to the theology you follow. My God does not see me as fallen, even though I have flaws. But I am only saying this to you because you are insisting on spreading your false religion in this forum. I do not wish to convert you, only to point out that your beliefs are best kept to where they are welcome instead of using them to insult others like Christians are wont to do.

[ryoder 1,410]

Hasn't everyone here fallen, usually from ~12,500 feet?

[gowlerk 1,956]

I get knocked down, but I get up again
You're never gonna keep me down
I get knocked down, but I get up again
You're never gonna keep me down
I get knocked down, but I get up again
You're never gonna keep me down
I get knocked down, but I get up again
You're never gonna keep me down

[JoeWeber 2,347]

9 minutes ago, ryoder said:

Hasn't everyone here fallen, usually from ~12,500 feet?

From the mouths of ryoder's.

[wolfriverjoe 1,368]

18 hours ago, ryoder said:

Hasn't everyone here fallen, usually from ~12,500 feet?

Well, that's free-fallen.

Somewhat different from the 'fall from grace', where God put the 'tree of knowledge' in front of Adam and Eve, then told them not to eat the fruit.
Kinda like putting hats with bricks under them on the sidewalk. 

No way someone won't come along and kick it.

So God gave the choice of living in ignorant 'paradise', which is basically slavery, and dying while 'having knowledge', which they really didn't.
And, of course, it was the woman's fault that we 'fell'. 

Said 'fall', of course, putting us right back in the same sort of slavery, where we have to kowtow to this 'God' fella, doing what the "high priests' tell us or risk spending 'all of eternity' being burned constantly.

'Cuz, you know, "God loves you".

If you stop and think about it, Q actually is more plausible.

[mistercwood 287]

1 hour ago, wolfriverjoe said:

So God gave the choice of living in ignorant 'paradise', which is basically slavery, and dying while 'having knowledge', which they really didn't.

Interestingly enough it was never really a choice. Logically, until we ate the fruit we didn't know that disobeying God was a bad thing. It's irrelevant that he said "Don't", all actions were morally equivalent up until *after* the fruit was consumed and the relevant knowledge was acquired.

[wolfriverjoe 1,368]

16 minutes ago, mistercwood said:

Interestingly enough it was never really a choice. Logically, until we ate the fruit we didn't know that disobeying God was a bad thing. It's irrelevant that he said "Don't", all actions were morally equivalent up until *after* the fruit was consumed and the relevant knowledge was acquired.

True. 

No matter what, it was a trap.

And, again, kinda funny how it only applied to humans.

Did, for example, cats 'fall from grace'?

They certainly can be pretty evil.
Don't get me wrong - I really love cats, have had a number of them throughout my life and they're great companions. But they can be rather greedy, devious and vicious little beasts.

[jaybird18c 4]

7 hours ago, mistercwood said:

Interestingly enough it was never really a choice. Logically, until we ate the fruit we didn't know that disobeying God was a bad thing. It's irrelevant that he said "Don't", all actions were morally equivalent up until *after* the fruit was consumed and the relevant knowledge was acquired.

It doesn't matter that God said "don't?"  Until the disobedience, man didn't know "that disobeying God was a bad thing?"  Where do you come up with this nonsense?

[billvon 2,471]

42 minutes ago, jaybird18c said:

It doesn't matter that God said "don't?" 

Well, quite literally - sorta not.  God said "don't" a lot.  "Don't work on Sundays."  "Don't wear mixed fabrics to church."  "Don't wear glasses and come near the altar."  "Don't eat pork."  "Don't eat shellfish."  "Don't plant more than one kind of seed in a plot of land."

What most people seem to do is say "well, I can ignore most of what he said in the Old Testament, because that was a long time ago, and the world was different, and this reason and that reason.  So in those cases it doesn't matter that God said 'don't'  ."

I bet you ignore some of those things as well, because it's just easier.

But to go back to his point, if you tell someone "don't do something" who doesn't know right from wrong, then they have no way to know that it's wrong to do that.  Like telling a blind man "stop at the red light."  He's not equipped to know there's a red light there to begin with.

 

[mistercwood 287]

1 hour ago, jaybird18c said:

It doesn't matter that God said "don't?"  Until the disobedience, man didn't know "that disobeying God was a bad thing?"  Where do you come up with this nonsense?

It's not nonsense, it's basic reasoning and logic. The concepts of good and evil did not exist for Adam and Eve prior to eating the fruit. They had to eat the fruit in order to gain the knowledge that disobedience of a command from God was wrong - it was basically entrapment to be honest.

Anyone who has done basic theological studies will have come across this paradox, and the appropriate resolution - that the eating of the fruit is a parable about boundaries and obeying God, not a literal recounting of events. Most of Genesis is in this vein, separating light from dark, the land from the seas etc is simply setting and reinforcing boundaries.

If it was the latter case and a literal retelling of events, by definition it would make God a right prick.

[jakee 1,279]

3 hours ago, jaybird18c said:

Where do you come up with this nonsense?

Says the man telling us we're all fucked because our great great grandma stole some magic fruit.

[jaybird18c 4]

7 hours ago, billvon said:

Well, quite literally - sorta not.  God said "don't" a lot.  "Don't work on Sundays."  "Don't wear mixed fabrics to church."  "Don't wear glasses and come near the altar."  "Don't eat pork."  "Don't eat shellfish."  "Don't plant more than one kind of seed in a plot of land."

What most people seem to do is say "well, I can ignore most of what he said in the Old Testament, because that was a long time ago, and the world was different, and this reason and that reason.  So in those cases it doesn't matter that God said 'don't'  ."

I bet you ignore some of those things as well, because it's just easier.

But to go back to his point, if you tell someone "don't do something" who doesn't know right from wrong, then they have no way to know that it's wrong to do that.  Like telling a blind man "stop at the red light."  He's not equipped to know there's a red light there to begin with.

 

Most of what you mentioned were laws, established by men, belonging to the Nation of Israel.  They were not laws established by God.  They were laws established by God's chosen people.

Back to your point.  I agree that if you tell someone don't do something who doesn't know right from wrong then they have no way to know that it's wrong to do that.  God gave Adam and Eve a conscience just like you and me.  Their right and wrong was made clear by him.  

[JoeWeber 2,347]

1 hour ago, jaybird18c said:

Their right and wrong was made clear by him. 

Apparently not.

[wolfriverjoe 1,368]

1 hour ago, jaybird18c said:

Most of what you mentioned were laws, established by men, belonging to the Nation of Israel.  They were not laws established by God.  They were laws established by God's chosen people.

 

So why do so many religious types quote the Bible when condemning homosexuality?

Saying that it goes against God.

Of course, they ignore all the other stuff Bill mentioned.

[gowlerk 1,956]

29 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

So why do so many religious types quote the Bible when condemning homosexuality?

Saying that it goes against God.

Of course, they ignore all the other stuff Bill mentioned.

In general, She gave us sex for Her amusement and to give us something to obsess over other than killing.

[jaybird18c 4]

2 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

So why do so many religious types quote the Bible when condemning homosexuality?

Saying that it goes against God.

Of course, they ignore all the other stuff Bill mentioned.

It's reiterated by the Apostle Paul making it contextually applicable to present day.  That aside, God's moral law, expressed in the 10 Commandments, prohibits all sexual immorality , not just homosexuality,  (e.g. outside the covavantal bounds of marriage which is defined by God as between one woman and one man.)  Again, reiterated by Jesus Christ himself.

[billvon 2,471]

5 hours ago, jaybird18c said:

Most of what you mentioned were laws, established by men, belonging to the Nation of Israel.  They were not laws established by God.  They were laws established by God's chosen people.

Like I said, you have decided you can ignore those laws for this reason and that reason.  And work on Sunday, even though that came from God.  But it's OK to work on Sunday because X Y and Z.  (You don't have to explain X Y and Z, I will take it on faith that you have reasons.)

And all that is completely fine.  You interpret the Bible how you see fit.  It just gets a little funny when people who make such decisions for themselves become OUTRAGED! when others interpret it in different ways.

Quote

 I agree that if you tell someone don't do something who doesn't know right from wrong then they have no way to know that it's wrong to do that. 

Cool, we agree there.  Odd that they would be punished for that.

Quote

That aside, God's moral law, expressed in the 10 Commandments, prohibits all sexual immorality , not just homosexuality,  (e.g. outside the covavantal bounds of marriage which is defined by God as between one woman and one man.)  Again, reiterated by Jesus Christ himself.

A married homosexual couple isn't being immoral by having sex.  They are every bit as righteous as a heterosexual married couple.  The only thing in the Bible that prohibits homosexuality are those "laws of man" that you just dismissed above; they are no more valid than the law that says you can't wear a fabric blend.

[jaybird18c 4]

12 minutes ago, billvon said:

Like I said, you have decided you can ignore those laws for this reason and that reason.  And work on Sunday, even though that came from God.  But it's OK to work on Sunday because X Y and Z.  (You don't have to explain X Y and Z, I will take it on faith that you have reasons.)

And all that is completely fine.  You interpret the Bible how you see fit.  It just gets a little funny when people who make such decisions for themselves become OUTRAGED! when others interpret it in different ways.

Cool, we agree there.  Odd that they would be punished for that.

A married homosexual couple isn't being immoral by having sex.  They are every bit as righteous as a heterosexual married couple.  The only thing in the Bible that prohibits homosexuality are those "laws of man" that you just dismissed above; they are no more valid than the law that says you can't wear a fabric blend.

Marriage is heterosexual as defined by God.

[billvon 2,471]

18 minutes ago, jaybird18c said:

Marriage is heterosexual as defined by God.

Where did God define that?  

[jaybird18c 4]

57 minutes ago, billvon said:

Where did God define that?  

Genesis 2

[billvon 2,471]

6 minutes ago, jaybird18c said:

Genesis 2

That says that men leave their parents to marry a woman.  It says nothing about how men can ONLY marry women, or that that is what marriage is defined as.

Got anything else?  Anything where God says "this is marriage and that's the ONLY valid marriage?"  Or "women can't marry women?"  Because I do seem to recall a lot of examples of polygamy in the Bible.  Consider Elka′nah.  He had two wives - Hannah and Penin'nah, two women united in marriage.

[mistercwood 287]

8 hours ago, jaybird18c said:

God gave Adam and Eve a conscience just like you and me.  Their right and wrong was made clear by him.  

Is there a particular passage you're using to back this claim up? As best I can tell, there is nothing to indicate they knew anything of right and wrong until *after* they ate the fruit.

[wolfriverjoe 1,368]

4 hours ago, jaybird18c said:

It's reiterated by the Apostle Paul making it contextually applicable to present day.  That aside, God's moral law, expressed in the 10 Commandments, prohibits all sexual immorality , not just homosexuality,  (e.g. outside the covavantal bounds of marriage which is defined by God as between one woman and one man.)  Again, reiterated by Jesus Christ himself.

Yup. You pick and choose which laws to believe and follow and which to ignore.

Tell me again about 'proclaiming righteousness'.

FWIW, the dad of the guy fired from Liberty U founded a group whose PRIMARY PURPOSE was to tell other people where they were falling short and how to do it right.