Discussion: Does Yahweh really love us?

[Symmetry]

i don't find it cannibalism, do you?

Why would I? I'm not Christian.

[shieldgenerator7]

ok. So you're not Christian. Do you consider yourself an aetheist or something else?

[tkr4lf]

I consider him to be a Rastafarian. Then again I know nothing about him, so that could be completely wrong.

[Symmetry]

I consider him to be a Rastafarian. Then again I know nothing about him, so that could be completely wrong.

Meh- at least you had a guess. I literally told the guy a few posts ago that I consider myself an atheist, but he still has to ask.

[Juan_Bottom]

I consider him to be a Rastafarian. Then again I know nothing about him, so that could be completely wrong.

Meh- at least you had a guess. I literallytold the guy a few posts ago that I consider myself an atheist, but he still has to ask.

Are you in the Godless Heathens yet? If "no," are you feeling ok buddy?

[shieldgenerator7]

I consider him to be a Rastafarian. Then again I know nothing about him, so that could be completely wrong.

Meh- at least you had a guess. I literally told the guy a few posts ago that I consider myself an atheist, but he still has to ask.

yeah, you did, and I remembered it, but sometimes people say their aetheists just to put down a simple answer but really have more complex beliefs. That's why I asked.

[natty dread]

sometimes people say their aetheists

I think you were thinking of aesthetics there.

It's spelled atheist, as in "a-theist" = not a theist.

Could of told you that

"Could've", as in could have.

I'm lowering both of your grades!

[shieldgenerator7]

sometimes people say their aetheists

I think you were thinking of aesthetics there.

It's spelled atheist, as in "a-theist" = not a theist.

Could of told you that

"Could've", as in could have.

I'm lowering both of your grades!

Ok, Prof. Natty I will try to do my best on spelling. When is recess?

[natty dread]

No recess for you. Detention.

[shieldgenerator7]

No recess for you. Detention.

What if I give you an apple, Prof. Natty?

[Lionz]

Natty,

Did Nero blame an Italian Peninsula fire on Christians by 64 CE or not? I might have even said 66 as opposed to 64 in error.

What do we actually decide to believe at all? That might come down to definition. Maybe young and old are relative and I do not have faith in Yah that would be destroyed by discovering an age of a planet.

Is it not true that either the earth has sedimentary layers that were layed down by a global flood or it does not? Even if we should not assume there was a global flood, should we assume that there was not one? Have you used numbers to try to prove there was not a global flood that are essentially numbers derived from using methods that assume there was not a global flood in the first place and then accused me of using circular reasoning?

Is there not enough water on earth to cover the earth in water if elevation can be smoothed out whether mountains are holding something back or not?

What do you request I look up exactly? What suggests to you that a man knows 10% of what's inside the earth, if something does?

I might know how old little to nothing is, but what is there really evidence for and against? We have been raised in a time where teaching earth is billions of years old earth is mainstream and it is rare for someone to promote information that conflicts with personal belief maybe.

Shield,

Muslims, Jews, and Christians are just believers in the same religion but are just huge denominations? Maybe we should be careful with what we claim. Sure Islam was not started by enemies of Yah and sure it does not revolve around an arab false deity of the moon?

Juan,

What suggests that Peter did not write 2 Peter and that Paul did not write 1 Timothy? And what does Numbers 31 have to do with child rape?

[BigBallinStalin]

WHere's my questions, Lionz?!?!

[owenshooter]

Yes I do... Lock 'er down!!!...-the black jesus

[natty dread]

Sure Islam was not started by enemies of Yah and sure it does not revolve around an arab false deity of the moon?

Wait a minute.

Lionz... are you Jack Chick?

[shieldgenerator7]

Lionz,
yes, my claim that Christianity, Islam, and Judaism are all the same seems like an extreme exaggeration. But did they not all come from the same source, Judaism? So despite being radically different, they are essentially huge demoninations under the same religion. Most of the time it seems they disagree, but I think all of us in these three religions are brothers and sisters in the same God.

Natty,
when did this whole teacher get up start anyways? Maybe you should start your own "Natty's Spelling School" thread. That'd be cool.

[Nola_Lifer]

Maybe this man can help you out. Spinoza. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_Spinoza
If you don't understand Atheism, Pantheism, etc,

It is a widespread belief that Spinoza equated God with the material universe. However, in a letter to Henry Oldenburg he states that: "as to the view of certain people that I identify god with nature (taken as a kind of mass or corporeal matter), they are quite mistaken".[27] For Spinoza, our universe (cosmos) is a mode under two attributes of Thought and Extension. God has infinitely many other attributes which are not present in our world. According to German philosopher Karl Jaspers, when Spinoza wrote "Deus sive Natura" (God or Nature) Spinoza meant God was Natura naturans not Natura naturata, and Jaspers believed that Spinoza, in his philosophical system, did not mean to say that God and Nature are interchangeable terms, but rather that God's transcendence was attested by his infinitely many attributes, and that two attributes known by humans, namely Thought and Extension, signified God's immanence.[28] Even God under the attributes of thought and extension cannot be identified strictly with our world. That world is of course "divisible"; it has parts. But Spinoza insists that "no attribute of a substance can be truly conceived from which it follows that the substance can be divided" (Which means that one cannot conceive an attribute in a way that leads to division of substance), and that "a substance which is absolutely infinite is indivisible" (Ethics, Part I, Propositions 12 and 13).[29] Following this logic, our world should be considered as a mode under two attributes of thought and extension. Therefore the pantheist formula "One and All" would apply to Spinoza only if the "One" preserves its transcendence and the "All" were not interpreted as the totality of finite things.[28]
Martial Guéroult suggested the term "Panentheism", rather than "Pantheism" to describe Spinoza’s view of the relation between God and the world. The world is not God, but it is, in a strong sense, "in" God. Not only do finite things have God as their cause; they cannot be conceived without God.[29] In other words, the world is a subset of God.
In 1785, Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi published a condemnation of Spinoza's pantheism, after Lessing was thought to have confessed on his deathbed to being a "Spinozist", which was the equivalent in his time of being called an atheist. Jacobi claimed that Spinoza's doctrine was pure materialism, because all Nature and God are said to be nothing but extended substance. This, for Jacobi, was the result of Enlightenment rationalism and it would finally end in absolute atheism. Moses Mendelssohn disagreed with Jacobi, saying that there is no actual difference between theism and pantheism. The entire issue became a major intellectual and religious concern for European civilization at the time, which Immanuel Kant rejected, as he thought that attempts to conceive of transcendent reality would lead to antinomies (statements that could be proven both right and wrong) in thought.
The attraction of Spinoza's philosophy to late 18th-century Europeans was that it provided an alternative to materialism, atheism, and deism. Three of Spinoza's ideas strongly appealed to them:
the unity of all that exists;
the regularity of all that happens; and
the identity of spirit and nature.
Spinoza's "God or Nature" [Deus sive Natura] provided a living, natural God, in contrast to the Newtonian mechanical "First Cause" or the dead mechanism of the French "Man Machine." Coleridge and Shelley saw in Spinoza's philosophy a religion of nature[1] and called him the "God-intoxicated Man."[14][30] Spinoza inspired the poet Shelley to write his essay "The Necessity of Atheism."[14]
Spinoza was considered to be an atheist because he used the word "God" [Deus] to signify a concept that was different from that of traditional Judeo–Christian monotheism. "Spinoza expressly denies personality and consciousness to God; he has neither intelligence, feeling, nor will; he does not act according to purpose, but everything follows necessarily from his nature, according to law...."[31] Thus, Spinoza's cool, indifferent God [32] is the antithesis to the concept of an anthropomorphic, fatherly God who cares about humanity.

[Lionz]

BBS,

What you want to discuss? : D

Natty,

Jack Chick?

SG7,

How does Islam come from Judaism, if it does?

[shieldgenerator7]

There's a whole history of how Judaism, Islam, and Christianity come from the same roots.
About the connection between Judaism and Islam, the Muslims say Abraham had another son other than Isaac, and his name was Ishmael. He and Abraham built this rectangular brick building which is still a center of worship today for the Muslims. I may be misquoting here, but it was Ishmael who branched off and started Islam. Basically, Judaism and Islam both decend from Abraham. Christianity branches off Judaism much later after the birth, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

[2dimes]

Sure shield but that's kind of like saying the original version of the Baltimore Colts, the Cleveland Browns, and the San Francisco 49ers, are all on the same side because they came from the AAFC.

[BigBallinStalin]

BBS,

What you want to discuss? : D

Dead Children.

Is it morally wrong to attach strings to their bodies and put on a puppet show if and only if my religion condones such actions?

[2dimes]

BBS,

What you want to discuss? : D

Dead Children.

Is it morally wrong to attach strings to their bodies and put on a puppet show if and only if my religion condones such actions?

Does your religion require you to kill them or is this only something you'd do if you found some dead ones?

[BigBallinStalin]

BBS,

What you want to discuss? : D

Dead Children.

Is it morally wrong to attach strings to their bodies and put on a puppet show if and only if my religion condones such actions?

Does your religion require you to kill them or is this only something you'd do if you found some dead ones?

Well, it's complicated. If those children belong to my religion, then it isn't acceptable unless it's on Friday for the entertainment hour during our weekly community meeting.

If it's a non-believers child, then... It's kind of like this: If you see a $20 lying on the ground, do you walk by such an easy opportunity or do you pick it up?

[2dimes]

BBS,

What you want to discuss? : D

Dead Children.

Is it morally wrong to attach strings to their bodies and put on a puppet show if and only if my religion condones such actions?

Does your religion require you to kill them or is this only something you'd do if you found some dead ones?

Well, it's complicated. If those children belong to my religion, then it isn't acceptable unless it's on Friday for the entertainment hour during our weekly community meeting.

If it's a non-believers child, then... It's kind of like this: If you see a $20 lying on the ground, do you walk by such an easy opportunity or do you pick it up?

Absolutely.

[BigBallinStalin]

BBS,

What you want to discuss? : D

Dead Children.

Is it morally wrong to attach strings to their bodies and put on a puppet show if and only if my religion condones such actions?

Does your religion require you to kill them or is this only something you'd do if you found some dead ones?

Well, it's complicated. If those children belong to my religion, then it isn't acceptable unless it's on Friday for the entertainment hour during our weekly community meeting.

If it's a non-believers child, then... It's kind of like this: If you see a $20 lying on the ground, do you walk by such an easy opportunity or do you pick it up?

Absolutely.

I'm glad you agree.

[2dimes]

Absolutely.

I'm glad you agree.

I don't even see how there could be a second side.