Summations Only

It is a choice actually. You choose to die or live. Everything is a choice.

The serpent being on the belly is a judgement, this is pretty clear. I am not sure why we are continuing this conversation we are just going into circles.I've stated my argument, and it is pretty well accepted in Jewish and Christian communities. IT is also very apparent in the old testament that the Jew was well aware of the evil being Satan (Ezekiel 28, Job 1). I will also say they were well aware of the christian practice, at the time a Jewish practice, of an internal adversary.Edited by Blue, : AddEdited by Blue, : AddEdited by Blue, : Add

Yes "Ha-Satan" is used in certain places but "Satan" is used to refer to "the being" in Job 1:6. SatanNo he has an opinion due to an interpretation, which all people living have to interpret it. Further trusting his vantage is just that, trust. He could be just as wrong as I am. There is no more likelihood that he is right and that I am wrong, or vice versa. Further a billion/billions of people agree with my vantage as there are 2.3 billion Christians on earth.

Yes, I know, slavery in the Bible was like a ride at Disneyland. I'm not arguing that God does not exist as per the Bibe. I'm arguing that if God did exist as per the Bible, He'd be the enemy.

quote:

---

I do think your comment is interesting regarding atheists not believing. Science does not merely support atheism. Science says nothing about if God exists.
  —blue

---

Science says nothing about God OR atheism.

quote:

---

Theists and atheists draw from science equally.

---

No they don't, creationists like Faith make up their own sciency sounding language.

quote:

---

If you don't agree you have a closed mind and thus DO believe.

---

That's just bizarr.

quote:

---

You even believe as far as to think morality is ultimately decided by man.

---

Ignoring the grammatical problems with that sentence, morality IS decided by man.

quote:

---

You do believe in nature.

---

What an odd thing to say; I don't have to believe in nature, I can see and touch it.

The serpent isn't being judged, though, uness you assume that there was a change in its circumstances. The serpent wasn't being deceptive. He told the truth; they didn't die on the same day. (I find it bizarre that Bible "literalsts" insist that the six days of creation were literal 24-hour days but the day Adam and Eve ate the fruit was not.)

Why would anybody choose to die?

Your argument is accepted in parts of the Christian and Jewish communities. It's far from universal. We are continuing this conversation because Bible literalists have a lot of misconceptions about the Bible - conflating snakes with Satan, conflating Satan with evil, etc. - and they often assume that their interpretation is the only one. It's to your benefit to know what the alternatives are.

I agree. It is a wager. Satan is doing God's bidding. This is perfectly fine especially since it does fit within both of their desires. Satan wishes to convince God is not all powerful, and God wishes to convince God is all powerful. AT this point, it is a matter of the human being tempted. You just have to realize that freely choosing God is a big deal. This is how God is CHOOSING to destroy Evil. Personally I think it is because God is creating a eternity in which people freely choose to be with God. Those that choose not to be with God, they will get just that... I am arguing that ancient Jews believed in both. They believed in "the satan" within their mind (internal struggle) and they believed in the "evil being of satan" as a deceptive being. The word satan has different meanings depending on the context of the scripture, hence the debate.Ref my prior post and the posted link.I prefer the argument that fits and answers all issues. God creating Evil as per in ringo's argument would most definitely argue God does not exist. IT does not make sense for God to create evil, and then turn around and command the created beings that he is seeking to be with eternally to not be evil (especially when you add Christ to the context). IT does make more sense that God created beings to be free, and beings of freedom make evil or good choices. And through that process evil will be destroyed. And in the end, those good beings as per God's law will live eternally with God.

Ask the person choosing to commit suicide. Further it is not reasonable to presume merely insane people commit suicide. We can compare this to serial killers. Maybe it is better to think that people who choose to live are insane?

I have not been made aware of anything new in this forum. I am not arguing certain points because I am not aware of the other points. As you probably are aware of the points I am arguing. Further, what is the point?

That's a cop-out. We generally recognize that people who "choose" to commit suicide are not thinking rationally. They are reacting to circumstances that are often temprary. (Permanent solution to temporary problem = not rational.)The question is: Why would anybody rationally, in the long term, choose death over life?

While I think there are several issues in the rest of this post, as well as some of your earlier ones, I find that other individuals are doing a fine job of countering those points and so will leave those to them. However, there is one section you typed out there that I had a question on: You are stating that God made these beings good and they chose evil. But, as God is all-knowing, doesn't he already know which of his created beings will choose evil? If he does not know that they will choose evil, then he is not all-knowing and if he does know, but chooses to still create them to choose evil, then he has knowingly created evil, correct? You cannot remove the fact from your God that he/she/it is supposed to know all of the results already, so Ringo's comments that God created evil can be seen as more likely to be correct. He knowingly created Satan, even though he knew he would eventually choose to attempt to usurp him. God created him with a choice, but knew the choice he would make. This means God created satan to make that choice, it was a planned for eventuality.Let's try it this way. If someone creates a magic wand that can change things into anything it (the wand, not the human) wants, knowing that eventually the wand begins to create murderous creatures. Then this creator of the product, knowing its faults, sells it to a person, wouldn't you hold the seller responsible should the created monster kill the buyer? God is no different, he knew which individuals would choose evil and created them anyway, therefore he created evil.

Are you aware that you're not the only person reading this forum?I'm not trying to convince you that you're wrong. I'm trying to convince anybody else reading the forum that you're wrong.

Bravo. You are correct. Actually creationist accept modern science including evolution, the bb, string theory, and so on. I personally prefer the electric universe model, at thunderbolts.info which refutes inflation, dark energy, black holes, and bb thought in that the universe is filled with electric currents. Ultimately it depends on the creationist. Further creationist work jobs within all sorts including all fields of science. We permeate all parts of society. One example is Dr Hugh Ross. I thought you just pointed out that Science says nothing about atheism and God? We are not writing a essay. Typically discussions don't follow exact grammatical law. Further didn't you learn in college that you can BREAK grammatical law as long as you KNOW grammatical law? I am guessing you never went to college. Probably why you have to derail the discussion with insults. ALSO there is no fact that man should decide what is moral. It is also a argument that "MAN" does decide morality. We could argue there is no evidence that God does exist and that ultimately the sum of all human thoughts and decisions are completed by man concluding man decides morality. The other argument is that God does exist and love only flows from God and that LOVE can't flow without God. We tend to argue everything came from SOMETHING instead of EVERYTHING came from NOTHING, as the atheist does argue. IT is pretty clear that in science "nothing" can't make something thus the process of science does suggest something created everything. IF you read Gen 1:1, as the first verse of creation prior to verse 3 or day 1, we see that God created the universe with all things in it including the earth. Then day 1 in verse 3, is what happened on the earth after it was created. This argument is actually being argued by Hugh Ross, and millions of others, who is a physicist.FYI: I don't give a fuck if I am using correct grammatical rules on this forum. IF you get the point great if you do not get the point, then argue the point.