The Almighty Afterthought

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10472
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1128 times
Contact:

The Almighty Afterthought

Post #1

Post by William »

'You shall surely die"

Genesis 2:15...
And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.
And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.


Given there were no other options made available on the breaking of this commandment, and with the Christian claim that the biblical God [BG] is the perfect parent-figure;

QFD: Is withholding/not providing other options [such as the possibility of forgiveness through repentance] really to be considered the perfect way to do parenting?

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5560
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 244 times
Been thanked: 205 times
Contact:

Re: The Almighty Afterthought

Post #31

Post by tam »

Peace again,
William wrote: Tue Dec 14, 2021 1:07 am [Replying to tam in post #29]

I did not say the RCC wrote the NT Tam. Are you saying that there was no priesthood in the early days of the Christian movement?
Then why bring up the RCC in the first place? Please note that it has not gone unnoticed that you have yet to answer the question and are instead deflecting. Perhaps because you are aware that your position is inconsistent.
You reject what does not align with your theology as being 'made up' by the "Christian priesthood". But then you use other things by those same supposed people... - tam
- Non-religious Christian spirituality

- For Christ (who is the Spirit)

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10472
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1128 times
Contact:

Re: The Almighty Afterthought

Post #32

Post by William »

[Replying to tam in post #31]
Then why bring up the RCC in the first place?
Because I have read you argue on occasion that the RCC are involved in corruption and are not the 'true' church, so I thought you might be able to appreciate how deception uses the priesthood.

But rather than ask you what biblical verses tell us who Satan murdered, or argue how the bible was not printed until well after the establishment of the RCC, or remind the reader that Greek and Roman cultism supported worship of human gods who were not above being sacrificed, I will - for the sake of argument - accept your belief that Jesus was referring to the garden god when he spoke of his Father.

This itself, just places biblical Jesus as someone who was not a great judge of character and suffered from infatuation in support of an idea of a god who was not a great parent-figure, but a liar and a murderer, as I have shown.

You can protest all you like that the god had no part in the death of Adam, and didn't withhold valuable information from him, but the story says it differently than you do.
So if you want to argue that The Christ supports such, that is your choice to do so. Christians have been making such claims for centuries and still have nothing to show for it.
You reject what does not align with your theology as being 'made up' by the "Christian priesthood". But then you use other things by those same supposed people...
Yes - I told you I have no horse in this race as I regard the garden story as made up, rather than literal.

I simply critique the obvious contradictions, using the biblical writing to expose the biblical writing as being non-trustworthy.

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5560
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 244 times
Been thanked: 205 times
Contact:

Re: The Almighty Afterthought

Post #33

Post by tam »

You still didn't answer the question, William.

You made a claim that Christ did not refer to the God of Israel ("YHWH") as His Father, but the evidence shows that He did. You then claimed that those quotes and scriptures which show this, were 'probably' made up by the "Christian priesthood". You claimed this for no other reason except that it refutes your belief. That kind of bias does not say much for the interpretation you present of the Garden of Eden account.
William wrote: Tue Dec 14, 2021 9:42 pm [Replying to tam in post #31]
Then why bring up the RCC in the first place?
Because I have read you argue on occasion that the RCC are involved in corruption and are not the 'true' church, so I thought you might be able to appreciate how deception uses the priesthood.
But the RCC did not write the gospels, so bringing up the RCC has nothing to do with your claim about the "Christian priesthood" "probably" making certain parts up. (the parts that refute your beliefs, at least)

But rather than ask you what biblical verses tell us who Satan murdered, or argue how the bible was not printed until well after the establishment of the RCC,


The bible might not have been printed as a whole book until after the establishment of the RCC (I do not know when it was printed as a whole book),but the individual books and letters and gospels were written beforehand.

So again, these things are not relevant to the question that I asked you.
or remind the reader that Greek and Roman cultism supported worship of human gods who were not above being sacrificed,


Once again, irrelevant.
I will - for the sake of argument - accept your belief that Jesus was referring to the garden god when he spoke of his Father.
It is not merely my 'belief'; it has been supported.

This itself, just places biblical Jesus as someone who was not a great judge of character and suffered from infatuation in support of an idea of a god who was not a great parent-figure, but a liar and a murderer, as I have shown.
You have shown none of these things, William. You have shown your person belief, your personal interpretation (biased, and inconsistent - considering anything that refutes your personal interpretation you delegate to 'oh that was probably made up').


As for the claim about Christ, as stated earlier:

Or... and this is just some crazy revolutionary idea perhaps... William is wrong.

Rather than Christ being wrong, or casting aspirations upon His character as well as upon His Father's, you might want to consider that you, yourself, are wrong.


Regardless of what you do though, when it comes to who I place my faith in and who I listen to and who I believe - well that's an easy choice: in Christ of course, always. I will remain in Him (and so also His Father).


You reject what does not align with your theology as being 'made up' by the "Christian priesthood". But then you use other things by those same supposed people...
Yes - I told you I have no horse in this race as I regard the garden story as made up, rather than literal.

I simply critique the obvious contradictions, using the biblical writing to expose the biblical writing as being non-trustworthy.
Yet you use some of that same biblical writing in an attempt to push your own beliefs, even though it most often means that you are ignoring the context of the parts you use. Your "critique" is contradictory and inconsistent. And despite your claim, if you actually had no horse in this race, you would not need to dismiss evidence as 'probably made up', just because that evidence refutes your claims.


I don't think there is much more to add than what has already been said, and I'm not going to continue on a pointless back and forth. So I think it is time for me to move on... (and in fact I would have had no interest in this thread at all, except that you brought over an entire post of mine from elsewhere, and I responded to that).


Peace again to you all,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy
- Non-religious Christian spirituality

- For Christ (who is the Spirit)

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10472
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1128 times
Contact:

Re: The Almighty Afterthought

Post #34

Post by William »

[Replying to tam in post #33]
Yes - I told you I have no horse in this race as I regard the garden story as made up, rather than literal.

I simply critique the obvious contradictions, using the biblical writing to expose the biblical writing as being non-trustworthy.
Yet you use some of that same biblical writing in an attempt to push your own beliefs,
I do not have beliefs Tam. As I wrote, I have no horse in this race as I regard the garden story as made up, rather than literal. That is not 'pushing belief'.

I have shown that - without adding [as you have done] but simply by taking what is written to show that the god of the garden did withhold information and was instrumental in insuring that Adam surely died.

Thus, the QFD answer is that withholding/not providing other options [such as the possibility of forgiveness through repentance] is really best not to be considered the perfect way to do parenting.

You have a different opinion on what good parenting is. Most Christians share that opinion.

Post Reply