Has taken a while but I have been exceptionally busy..
The same reason anyone kills a cockroach or a fly in their house. They're nasty
I disagree. They're not "nasty", they're just different. Unlike you I generally pick them up and put them in a more appropriate setting for them and me, (namely outside). From your argument it would seem that makes me better than god. You excuse his acts of annihilation on the basis that, just like cockroaches apparently, we are nasty.. and thus need to be annihilated.
Being an animal lover I don't do that, and nor would I do that if I were a human loving god.
God didn't tell you to get nasty but you are, and so are the other people he killed.
I disagree. I'm not being nasty, just different. Man I've seen my dog eat his own faeces. It might seem wrong to me but that's no excuse to kill him.
You disagree that Adam and Eve actually had a choice to be sinless (perfect) like God or sinful like we are.
You simply have no case and no argument here. They had no knowledge of good and evil until eating from the tree of
knowledge of good and evil and as such would have been working purely on instinct.
You resent that you are born with the nature God abhors
I disagree.
A) I'm an atheist, there's no such thing as a god.
B) I actually like myself. Admittedly I should cut down on the smoking, but otherwise I'm at peace with myself.
yet he gave you a way out and you won't take it: Jesus who died on the cross so you wouldn't have to.
It is of no consequence to my nature, to who I am. Look Woody, the only way you can ever have a decent afterlife is to worship Lenny the leprechaun. That's all you are saying to me. It's meaningless isn't it?
By the way I'm still waiting for your apology for calling me a liar concerning some "Frodo" whom I don't even have a clue about.
Sorry, but I have no reason to believe or trust you. When I mentioned Frodo you said: "I don't watch movies". This is somewhat of a giveaway.
You claim they can't know what sin is without being sinners first.
Wrong. I state that they didn't have knowledge of good and evil before eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil that gave them knowledge of good and evil. They could have been given knowledge of good and evil by their god, but instead they had to eat a fruit and then be damned for eating a fruit that would give them the required knowledge of whether to eat the fruit or not.
Gold medal on it's way.
so Jesus blows your A&E argument right out of the water
You're talking out of your rectum. Your statement wasn't even relevant.
Are you going to call Jesus a sinner too? He could have sinned if he wanted to -- the devil tried hard, but Jesus passed where A&E failed
Why would you say jesus passed? Let's look at your earlier statements:
"Jesus knows what sin is -- actually he was "made sin" according to the bible"
So.. jesus passed because jesus knows what sin is, indeed was made sin. Adam and Eve didn't know.
I have two natures and you have one
Well, even if that were the case, then there's nothing I can do about it. Unlike you I wasn't born with "multiple" natures, (although I currently do treat people for those kind of problems). My nature is my nature - be there 1 or 101.
In the next life the old nature will be a worm in the dung heap for you, but the new nature will be a well springing forth to everlasting life for me.
In the long run I guess I would be thankful. Although 80, (if lucky), is admittedly a tad short, I couldn't even begin to express my distaste for a never ending life. I would be so piss bored after 50 million gazillion trillion squillion squillion years that I'd happily take the first option.
When you're a worm in the crap pile, you can say God made you that way -- ok if that's the nature you want to have then keep it.
Oh? Who was it that made it that way if not your god? Some other god?
I suppose maggots like to eat rotten flesh, but I don't have to chose to be one, and neither do you.
When dead, it isn't going to make a difference what maggots do or do not do.
I don't know why they only had manna to eat. Maybe their shit didn't stink. 600 thousand turds a day -- think about it.
Well shit tends to smell more when a person does not have a decent diet - but in either case it's a bit of a piss poor excuse. Could god not have just clicked his fingers and made the shit not smell, or just vanish? (Although in the bible he does tell people to bury their shit).
Not much of a comeback either really. The fact is you already made my point and argued my case for me. I need not say much more.
They didn't have the disease problems before. Sounds like manna took care of some sanitation engineering for such a crowd. Ever been to an outdoor event where 600 thousand people are gathered for a day without porta-johns or running water?
Well, some valid research on how manna makes your shit less disease causing and less smelly than your shit if you eat anything other than manna is needed.
So all of the nation of Israel died in the wilderness.
Quite a lot did.. by god's own hand all because they asked for a varied diet.
none of the survivors had to eat quail until they were sick of it after the manna was taken away?
In this instance god would be the dumbest fucker you've ever met. Why could he not vary their diet? Give them manna till they're sick of it and then give them quail until they're sick of it. No wonder they wanted to go back to Egypt.. At least there they weren't put in such a position.
Seriously Woody.. is it that bad to ask god for a varied diet?
yeah, the catholics. Ever wondered why there isn't a commandment in the bible that says: Thou shalt not spill the seed?
You're saying that if it isn't specifically written in black and white in the bible then it has no meaning?
Isn't that exactly what happens with a nocturnal emmission, being a male of the species, surely you've had one before.
Certainly, but it lacks something that masturbation and not impregnating your dead brother's wife have in common:
Intent.
When it's time, I don't see any harm in it, and it can be done in just a few seconds if that long.
Yeah, quite a few people suffer from that problem.
However, if you're going to fantisize or read pornography while you're doing it, and it becomes an addiction -- yeah big problem
Why is it a problem to fantasize?
So why make a semantical argument out of fear/reverance/faith just because their meanings overlap?
Their meanings don't overlap. When faith is the issue they use faith. When 'fear' is the issue, they say fear.
It was a guess, since I've never heard of him before except from you
Yeah right.
In other words, you don't want to admit the analogy between Confucious and Christ vis-a-vis in about the same period of human history.
Incorrect. I told you to start a confucious thread where I will happily discuss confucious. I see no valid reason to drag this conversation and thread onto someone completely different.
that were personally witnessed by thousands of people
What "thousands of people"? Names please.
As for the fictional characters such as gilgamesh, et al that were claimed to be real - this was religion mandated from day one by the political authorities -- believe it or else without any resistance -- who believes it now?
Not exactly, no.. But it raises an interesting point. Christianity was hardly worth batting an eyelid at - few followers etc. Then it became "mandated" by political authorities and anyone that resisted ended up getting slaughtered.
I believe A&E did not fear God before they sinned
Of course not. Without knowledge of good and evil, god was completely meaningless. They could fart and piss in his face without giving it a moments thought.
