I Know That God Does Not Exist

quote:

---

You do know, of course, that what you say here is exactly what I was referring to as the "fleshly" inability to understand the things of the spirit..

---

You do know that what you said there confirms my opinion that the things of the spirit are simply falsehoods, dressed up in religion to deceive.

quote:

---

in the case I was describing God's judgments for sin, and you are showing quite nicely that just as I said you don't LIKE that idea. So what else is new?

---

I was pointing out that the described actions fit the definition of genocide. Thus it is a fact that they are genocide and any denial is false.The UN definition of genocide states: Your intended distinction is simply not present in the definition, and is therefore irrelevant.As I stated in previous discussion you would do better to argue for justifiable genocide as a parallel to justifiable homicide.Edited by PaulK, : Fixed tag

Of course God isn't subject to the judgments of the UN but the UN is subject to God's judgments. Human beings can't exercise such judgments, only God can. All you are doing is stating your opinion again, which means nothing. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I understand your point.
My point wasn't intended to be so much a contradiction to yours as it was meant to be a contrast.Your point is that it takes spiritual discernment in order to understand and learn from such events.
My point is that it takes the testing of reality in order to understand and learn from such events.You seem to imply that those without "spiritual discernment" will never be able to understand such events.
I imply that anyone who tests reality can understand such events.It's just a contrast.

quote:

---

Of course God isn't subject to the judgments of the UN but the UN is subject to God's judgments.

---

The UN is quite able to define genocide - definitions are well within human capacities. Your talk of judgement is simply an attempt to avoid the facts. Which is all your spiritual things amount to. A pretext to pretend that you are right, when you obviously are not.

What exactly do you have in mind about what can be learned from such events as "reality" as opposed to God's judgments? Of course you can learn from all such things but it's a different kind of knowledge, and to understand them as God's judgments requires a different kind of discernment. "Fear of God is the beginning of wisdom" points to this kind of knowledge, the knowledge that "the wages of sin is death" which is what the Fall brought into the world, death and disease and all kinds of disasters. It's not that we can't learn practical things for dealing with such events, and I regard those as God's mercies, but the events themselves are produced by the Moral Law. And I also think the system of Karma in Hinduism and Buddhism is a roughly intuited understanding of that law. THAT is the spiritual reality that underlies mere physical reality.

Anything we've ever learned. Exactly. I agree as well. Such "practical things" are exactly the things we've learned from testing reality - how to remove our ignorance and make progress.Since you agree that such things exist to be learned as "reality" as opposed to God's judgements... what is your answer?What are the things that can be learned through "spiritual discernment" that cannot be learned without such spiritual discernment? What is?
"Fear of God is the beginning of wisdom?"
"The wages of sin is death?"
"Death and disease and all kinds of disasters entered the world from The Fall?"
"...the events themselves are produced by the Moral Law?"It seems to me that these are things you just say.
Things that are written in the Bible.
Things that are known to be wrong, or known to be off, or known to be... lacking in detail to the point of being useless.Things where testing reality has made much more progress.Like how schools and trades and apprenticeships use testing against reality to pass wisdom down from one generation to the next. Fear of God is not required and can even be a hindrance.Like how medical leaders test against reality to learn how a human body works, and that death occurs when the environment prevents such workings. The wages of sin are extraneous and never seem to have any impact at all.Like how death and disease and all kinds of disasters have always been on Earth as testing reality shows they are a much a part of Earth as humans are. The Fall was never required and likely never happened.Like how the events themselves are produced by physical laws of motion and fluid/matter dynamics as testing reality has grown our understandings of weather and volcanoes and tropical storms to the extent of being able to begin to predict their occurrences. This "Moral Law" doesn't seem to have any impact, nor does it help us predict anything to any useful level of detail.What has spiritual discernment taught us, again?
Anything more than feelings that can equally be obtained without "spiritual discernment" anyway?
Anything that can't be equally (or better) taught to us by testing reality?

What you could learn from a disaster purely physically is how to strengthen the structure of say a bridge that collapsed, but in terms of God's judgment you could learn that the nation is under judgment and change laws to conform to God's law. In our day and age we won't learn that of course, because it might mean learning such a thing as that murdering millions of unborn babies is bringing disaster down on us. Etc.

If that were true, it would have been learned by now.How long has God's judgement been around? Since the beginning of time?
Same with the idea of testing against reality to learn about reality.Yet - no nation has ever built better bridges, or lowered the deaths of babies (born or unborn) after attempting to "conform to God's law." Not ever. There has never been a prosperous nation that "conformed to God's law."
And - many nations have built better bridges, and lowered the deaths of babies (born or unborn) after attempting to "test against reality."
There have only ever been prosperous nations that "tested against reality."Also, testing against reality has taught us that collapsed bridges have reasons why they collapse - inappropriate materials, inappropriate design, or prolonged/inappropriate usage.There is no connection between a bridge collapsing and murdering millions of unborn babies.
Just as the bridges in Nazi Germany didn't all collapse during/after the murder of millions of Jews.You're lacking too many details.
Saying "bridges collapse due to God's judgement of millions of unborn babies dying" is the same as saying "disasters happen eventually - but I'm personally attributing them to these reasons because I feel it fits."Which has been proven to be a very bad, and false, way to think about reality.
It prevents progress, doesn't fix any bridges, and worse - doesn't save any babies.

It would have been learned by now? Excuse me while I try to get up from the floor. With my arthritis this may take a while, not to mention that laughing interferes with the effort.

Take your time, health comes first.Yes, it would have been learned by now.
If "conforming to God's law made a nation prosperous" was true - it would have been learned by now.
Every nation would have a large and growing prominent section devoted to "understanding and applying God's law."
Details would be chased after.
Specifics would become clear.
Questions would become increasingly minute.Just as "learning" works for every other subject.Because people always do what works.
And when it doesn't work - it fails.Like bridges built with inappropriate materials - learned by testing against reality.
Like mental health sustained with appropriate tools - learned by testing against reality.Like the US, under "so many variations of Christianity" - prospered by the industrial revolution - learned by testing against reality - not by conforming to God's law.
Like Britain, under Anglican Christianity - prospered by it's wealth and navy - learned by testing against reality - not by conforming to God's law.
Like China, not under the Christian God at all - prospered by the technical revolution - learned by testing against reality - not by conforming to God's law.
Like Rome, under the Roman Catholic church - prospered by it's army - learned by testing against reality - not by conforming to God's law.They all prospered as they tested against reality, regardless of attempts to "conform to God's law" or not.
They were all surpassed by another nation that's better at testing against reality - not any nation "conforming better to God's law."Name a nation that prospered by conforming to God's law and not testing against reality.
Name how it was surpassed by another nation that's better at conforming to God's law, regardless of attempts to test against reality.Why is it that all prosperous nations have their major reason for being prosperous tied to testing against reality and not "conforming to God's law?"
Has no one ever tried to conform to God's law?
Is God's Law not useful enough for a group of people to get together and conform to it in order to build a prosperous nation?
Is God's Law not strong enough to keep a group of people together to out-perform other nations?
Is God's Law not smart enough to foresee future issues and deal with them before they become a problem?Testing against reality can do all of that.
And, although it can be used to foresee future issues and deal with them - it doesn't prevent a different nation from testing against reality better and gaining an upper hand - as history shows.

Yes, so when infrastructure falls apart, when planes crash from bad design, when the WTC is attacked and the buildings fall down, when we have a civil war as we did, when our borders are wide open so anyone can come in for any reason, when enemies are able to get hold of our secrets, oh name it there are all kinds of ways things can go wrong, a whole bunch of them spelled out in the books of Deuteronomy and Leviticus too which we haven't yet experienced but very well may -- anyway yes if we have such failures you think we'll explain them in terms of God's judgments? Really?

No.
I don't think any of those can be explained according to God's judgements.
I don't think anything at all can be explained according to God's judgement - as you've offered nothing that has ever been explained by God's judgement that doesn't have a better or equivalent explanation from testing against reality.I think "God's judgement" is an old tradition carried over that simply means "I don't know - but here's something I attribute it to so that it doesn't look like I don't know to anyone who doesn't stare too long."Which, amusingly, if the honest phrasing was used - more progress would even be made as certain people would be quicker to identify the issue, test against reality, and actually find a real solution to make real prosperous progress.

Yet the Bible clearly shows that humans can and in fact should judge God when God is acting or going to act immorally. And Faith, we have been over this many, many, many, many, many, many times.Genesis 18:22-33 Faith. Have you ever actually read the Bible Faith?

quote:

---

22Then the men turned away from there and went toward Sodom, but Abraham still stood before the Lord. 23And Abraham came near and said, Would You also destroy the righteous with the wicked? 24Suppose there were fifty righteous within the city; would You also destroy the place and not spare it for the fifty righteous that were in it? 25Far be it from You to do such a thing as this, to slay the righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous should be as the wicked; far be it from You! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?

​

26So the Lord said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes.

​

27Then Abraham answered and said, Indeed now, I who am but dust and ashes have taken it upon myself to speak to the Lord: 28Suppose there were five less than the fifty righteous; would You destroy all of the city for lack of five?

​

So He said, If I find there forty-five, I will not destroy it.

​

29And he spoke to Him yet again and said, Suppose there should be forty found there?

​

So He said, I will not do it for the sake of forty.

​

30Then he said, Let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak: Suppose thirty should be found there?

​

So He said, I will not do it if I find thirty there.

​

31And he said, Indeed now, I have taken it upon myself to speak to the Lord: Suppose twenty should be found there?

​

So He said, I will not destroy it for the sake of twenty.

​

32Then he said, Let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak but once more: Suppose ten should be found there?

​

And He said, I will not destroy it for the sake of ten. 33So the Lord went His way as soon as He had finished speaking with Abraham; and Abraham returned to his place.

---

It is very unpleasant to be lied about.

Your example is unclear. Abraham knew the Lord. God was not simply some character on a scroll.
And the U.N. is full of many different relative beliefs, including atheism.Notice how humble and respectful Abraham is before the Creator of all seen and unseen.Before the U.N. is prepared to receive Gods mercy they need to collectively learn to respect Him. (and first of all know Him)