Consider the fact that what he was posting had nothing to do with the topic of the thread.
-
This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.
God's attitude towards science and progress
- Thread starter iouae
- Start date
popsthebuilder
New member
God was trying?
You are aware that what GOD decrees, HE simply says and it comes to be, right.?
What I am trying to say is that GOD doesn't have to try to do anything. If it is HIS will then it will be done.
Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
So God didn't slow evil down by confusing the languages? Or the Flood? Take out the word trying from my post.
popsthebuilder
New member
Thank you. That is all I wanted you to see.
Yes GOD slowed advancement in the story of the tower of Babel.
Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
Revelation 1:3 KJV
3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.
Revelation 22:6-7 KJV
6 And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.
7 Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book.
First it is something you read, as you apparently do now, then it becomes a walk, (and blessed are those who keep the sayings written therein), then in your End it becomes crucified with Messiah: just ask Paul who openly tells you where he gets the Good News Gospel that he preaches, (Gal 1:12). However if you had not come into my thread, put me on ignore, and then proceeded to derail my thread, you would have already known why what I said to iouae is absolutely true. In fact I am surprised that you did not still have me on ignore now: but not that it matters either way, and as a matter of fact, you can now put me right back on ignore and I will be a happy camper since you have already denied the words of the Messiah anyways.
iouae
Well-known member
However if you had not come into my thread, put me on ignore, and then proceeded to derail my thread, you would have already known why what I said to iouae is absolutely true. In fact I am surprised that you did not still have me on ignore now: but not that it matters either way, and as a matter of fact, you can now put me right back on ignore and I will be a happy camper since you have already denied the words of the Messiah anyways.
I am not ignoring you Daqq. I did not want to disrupt your thread further so I found another hobby
But on the subject of "ignore"...
I have a memory so I can just remember to ignore someone if I find they have nothing to add to a discussion.
And how many people are on ignore that one needs a list.
I don't even know how one "ignores" someone, and don't feel a need to find out.
Also, if I put them on ignore, might they not be speaking about me without my knowing about it?
If someone says they will put me on their ignore list, I would make a point of speaking about them, including them in my posts. But that is just me
Your use of the term good is meaningless when applied to God and so don't pretend like we are saying the same thing. We aren't!
How do you know that the bible isn't a lie? How do you know that God isn't a very clever and complex liar and that everything in the bible is there to deceive us into believing that acting in the best interest of others and believing that He became a man and died for our sin will somehow make us more acceptable in His sight but that it's actually all just a hoax played out for the benefit of God's Celestial Bar and Grill drinking buddies over which they're all having a big drunken laugh?
How do you know, Vowels?
If you THINK otherwise, refute a single point I've made. If you can do it, I'd be glad to hear it.
Saying it doesn't make it so, vowels!
I cited sources. Legitimate experts in the Greek language as well as theologians the caliber of no less that Justin Martyr have said it a long long time before I did. And there is simply no denying that the Greek word logos is where we get the English suffix "-ology" and why we have words like "biological". Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, my use of the term is quite accurate and far more so than translating it into the meaningless use of the term "word", which I suspect was only done because of the same emotional issues that you are having with the more accurate translation that I've presented.
Saying it doesn't make it so, Vowels!
That is NOT the reason Logos is translated that way. Although there is a clear connection between the two concepts, there is nothing in the context that would indicate that this should be the English translation, which is why it sounds so cryptically meaningless to the English speaking audience.
This is a nice and even true sentiment but it has exactly zero to do with John chapter one. The first chapter of John is talking about the light of understanding and comprehension (or the lack thereof). John was talking in terms of reason.
Okay, fine and dandy. That has totally nothing at all to do with what John was discussing.
Resting in Him,
Clete
First of all, I have found another and have presented it quite clearly. Your pretention to the contrary is only indicative of your inability to refute it.
And anyone can be happy with with their made up version of whatever god they want to serve. The Buddhist is quite happy with his version and those who used the bible to justify race based slavery were entirely happy with their version of God too. The point here is that your emotional state of mind has nothing at all to do with determining the truth. There's all sort of really happy delusional people all over the place.
All truth is logical, Vowels. There is no such thing as an irrational truth. That doesn't mean that we can comprehend everything nor that we can figure every truth out. But that isn't because there is something that is "super-rational". It simply means that we don't have the information needed and/or the context within which to properly conceptualize what information we do have. And so, while we are limited in our ability and intelligence, we have indeed been give the mind of Christ, which, given that He is Logic (Logos) means that we are not so limited as some would have you believe. We are, for example, never asked to believe anything that is contrary to reason. God does not ask us to believe the irrational (i.e. self-contradictory or otherwise absurd).
Such questions belie the tiny view of God you have and belittles the error people make by rejecting the God of Life who made them and as such you directly imply that you believe God to be unjust. You have no idea what you're even asking!
I would not normally entertain such questions. They are inherently blasphemous but we're well beyond that worry at this point and so...
Yes, I believe that all human being are inherently eternal beings and that we will either spend eternity with God or without Him. As for the sort of torture that is commonly believed, I actaully don't know. I suspect that the flames of Hell are not actual physical flames but that it is figurative in the sense that there isn't another way to properly communicate the conditions one will experience in Hell other than to analogize it to unending fire. It could, however, be actual fire. Regardless, this I know for certain - God is just and whatever happens to those who spend eternity apart from Him will experience precisely what they deserve to experience. Not only that but when I see God face to face, I will fully understand what God is doing and why He is doing it and will agree with His every action no matter how severe or against whom it is directed. I may not like it but I will understand and agree with it.
Revelation 21:4a And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes;
Resting in Him,
Clete
iouae
Well-known member
Yes, mine I have defined, yours not. Yours goes "good means conducive to life" or something like that which is meaningless. Mine is "Whatever God wills/wants is good". And to know what God wants, I look at How he has done things in the past.
Where did this come from? Do you sometimes think that? When have I ever suggested God is just fooling us? You seem to think I have no respect for God's goodness? That does not follow at all from my definition of "good".
By the way, you saw my question. Would a "logical" "reasonable" and "good" God gain anything by having your or my unsaved child burning eternally in hell while we walk the streets of gold? And don't say I have a bad attitude towards God by asking this. I am testing your definition of God's "good".
I don't know any more than any other Christian why God might not just be conning us.
To me, it's irrelevant. I am enjoying life as a gift from Him, and if God conned me into worshipping Him, only to find there is no eternal life, I would still like to fall down at His feet and kiss them for giving me this physical life alone.
I am going to disappoint you. If I find a Greek or Hebrew word, in this case the Heb "dabar" and the Gk. "logos" I go to strong and see how its most commonly used. It's translated "word" in both Heb and Gk. never "logic". Thus I know it means "word" not "logic".
And Christ's name is "The Word" in both testaments, as I explained in a post. Not "the logic". Logic is not the translation of dabar or logos. End of story.
Strong's says so. That settles it.
But the Bible never translates it "logic". It translates these words "word". That settles it.
Saying it doesn't make it so, Vowels!
Sorry, but I trust Strongs more than you.
iouae
Well-known member
Do you realise that in the explanation above you have said "If God wills it, it must be good" or "It must be good because God willed it"? You have just, unwittingly used my exact definition of how God is good.
You never mentioned "logic" or "reason" because there could be no logical or reasonable reason to punish the wicked eternally.
Does what God wills always come to pass?
popsthebuilder
New member
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Progressing knowledge........
Progressing knowledge........
Agreed.
Creator and Creation allows for all potentials and possibilities of good and evil to exist, - so 'God' is the source-provider of all 'science' (knowledge/gnosis) and all 'progress', hence the Creator/Creation is pro-gnosis, and by His creative will, definitely 'progressive'
Free will allows all potentials and possibilities of experience, the entire spectrum, all dualities, all polar opposites and inbetweens possible (light/darkness ; positive/negative).
If God is infinite love and good, naturally his will is the impetus and inspiration behind all science and progress whose aim is life enhancing and life fulfilling.
Technology is interesting in this scenario, since it can be used towards any end. How to marry or synergize technology with spirituality is most interesting as in AI......can such intelligence be used or guided by Spirit, since it is 'artificial', 'mechanical' or merely 'programmed'? Can an android be morally responsible or possess a rational soul? This particular inquiry could merit its own thread
The fact of our own free will speaks of our co-creativity with God, who sponsors our illumination and progress forward. All creation/evolution reveals and confirms such.
Progressing knowledge........
Agreed.
Creator and Creation allows for all potentials and possibilities of good and evil to exist, - so 'God' is the source-provider of all 'science' (knowledge/gnosis) and all 'progress', hence the Creator/Creation is pro-gnosis, and by His creative will, definitely 'progressive'
Free will allows all potentials and possibilities of experience, the entire spectrum, all dualities, all polar opposites and inbetweens possible (light/darkness ; positive/negative).
If God is infinite love and good, naturally his will is the impetus and inspiration behind all science and progress whose aim is life enhancing and life fulfilling.
Technology is interesting in this scenario, since it can be used towards any end. How to marry or synergize technology with spirituality is most interesting as in AI......can such intelligence be used or guided by Spirit, since it is 'artificial', 'mechanical' or merely 'programmed'? Can an android be morally responsible or possess a rational soul? This particular inquiry could merit its own thread
The fact of our own free will speaks of our co-creativity with God, who sponsors our illumination and progress forward. All creation/evolution reveals and confirms such.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
I was a bit firm in my exposure mostly on 'wrongful labelling' and did call that specific behavior out. It just shows how many are still ignorant about what 'Urantia' even is, despite a whole thread existing to educate in that direction.
Btw, the UB highly expounds and promotes both science and progress using the human knowledge extant in the early 20th century, but expanding it into a higher/broader cosmological context, since all creation is moving along...as a creative evolution. Science therefore is essential to progress.
I only read the first pages of this thread and spoke with zeke himself concerning the Urantia charge, which is baloney.
iouae
Well-known member
Technology is interesting in this scenario, since it can be used towards any end. How to marry or synergize technology with spirituality is most interesting as in AI......can such intelligence be used or guided by Spirit, since it is 'artificial', 'mechanical' or merely 'programmed'? Can an android be morally responsible or possess a rational soul? This particular inquiry could merit its own thread
I love technology.
At the same time I read about folks sitting under their vines and fig trees, lions lying down with lambs, and it sounds low tech. We may be surprised if Christ does not rebuild the high tech factories, but instead we have an agriculture based society. If God gives rain in due season, no pests (Deut 28) it does away with the need for Syngenta and big pharma.
If one has God, we don't need instruments to see back to the Big Bang, or electron microscopes. We could just ask God how His creation works. Technology does complicate life, and has folks interacting with their phones, not each other personally. With strong communities, will travel be necessary?
Maybe we should enjoy technology while we have it. I believe it is entirely possible to live without it, as in Eden.
I would love to live on a farm to try out life without it.
In what world is that meaningless?
Murder is wrong because it is not "conducive to life", (to use your terminology). Executing murders is right precisely because it is "conducive to life".
Sin is wrong because it leads to death! Gee! I wonder where I heard that one? OH! I remember! That was Solomon! The wisest man to ever walk the Earth (excepting Jesus, of course)
Proverbs 11:19 As righteousness leads to life, So he who pursues evil pursues it to his own death.
Then there's another, more obscure character in the bible who agrees with me. Maybe you've heard of him...
Deuteronomy 30:15 “See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil,
WOW! Maybe I'm not just making this stuff up off the top of my head after all! Moses said all this more than three thousand years ago! :noway:
Sarcasm aside, those two verses alone are enough to establish that the bible defines right vs. wrong as life vs. death. That is the definition of right and wrong. So says God's own word. Nowhere do we read in God's word that good is defined by God's arbitrary fiat command/action.
No, you don't! You look to what the bible says he did in the past. A bible which you acknowledge is God's word. The problem is that any old thing God might happen to do is "good" by default. So maybe God just made it up! How would you know otherwise?
The whole point is that your so called definition isn't a definition. It's the opposite of a definition. It renders the word literally meaningless! ANYTHING God might do is "good" according to you. He could do literally anything anyone might conjure up and he would remain righteous, according to your "definition". You cannot therefore say that you know anything about what God has done because "ANYTHING" includes making it all up from whole cloth!
It's called an unintended consequence, Vowels. Words mean things and ideas have consequences. That's the reason why these issues aren't merely trivial points of conversation. It matters what we think about God and Who He is and why. It matters because if we get that point wrong, it undermines our entire theological construct.
I'll say what I think is true. The fact is that your question implies a belief that God is unjust because the existence of Hell and the fact that people will be sent there for eternity is as clearly taught in the bible as is the fact that God created Adam and Eve. You think that it's unjust or else the question could never occur to you to ask. There'd be no way that you'd think I'd have a hard time answering the question otherwise.
That is an astonishing admission. What it ought to do, (but won't), is to shine a glaring light in your own mind at the enormous error in your doctrine.
I on the other hand know without any shadow of a doubt that God is righteous and has always been so and could not be the sort of person that has a laugh over drinks about the poor schmuck humans that he's got thinking have a prayer of surviving their physical death. And I do not mean that I believe it strongly. I KNOW IT. The same way I know the difference between a circle and a square or the difference between a sheep and a wolf. It isn't my opinion or my wish or my desire or my feeling. It is so because it must be by logical NECESSITY.
Whether something is relevant is not a matter of opinion. It's either relevant or it isn't.
Yeah, sure! Because this is how you respond to anyone else who deceives you! Come on, man! Be honest with yourself at least! I mean think through the things you say. What makes you think you wouldn't be angry as can be to find out that the God you've worshiped your whole life doesn't actually exist and that instead he's a drunken lout who pauses his laughter at your agony only long enough to burp up a little beer into the back of his throat?
Really? That's what you call a refutation? Talk about laughable!
Here's a quotation (a direct copy/paste) from Strong's (note the portion I put into bold letter)....
λόγος logos
of speech
a word, uttered by a living voice, embodies a conception or idea
what someone has said
a word
the sayings of God
decree, mandate or order
of the moral precepts given by God
Old Testament prophecy given by the prophets
what is declared, a thought, declaration, aphorism, a weighty saying, a dictum, a maxim
discourse
the act of speaking, speech
the faculty of speech, skill and practice in speaking
a kind or style of speaking
a continuous speaking discourse - instruction
doctrine, teaching
anything reported in speech; a narration, narrative
matter under discussion, thing spoken of, affair, a matter in dispute, case, suit at law
the thing spoken of or talked about; event, deed
its use as respect to the MIND alone
reason, the mental faculty of thinking, meditating, reasoning, calculating
account, i.e. regard, consideration
account, i.e. reckoning, score
account, i.e. answer or explanation in reference to judgment
relation, i.e. with whom as judge we stand in relation
reason would
reason, cause, ground
of speech
a word, uttered by a living voice, embodies a conception or idea
what someone has said
a word
the sayings of God
decree, mandate or order
of the moral precepts given by God
Old Testament prophecy given by the prophets
what is declared, a thought, declaration, aphorism, a weighty saying, a dictum, a maxim
discourse
the act of speaking, speech
the faculty of speech, skill and practice in speaking
a kind or style of speaking
a continuous speaking discourse - instruction
doctrine, teaching
anything reported in speech; a narration, narrative
matter under discussion, thing spoken of, affair, a matter in dispute, case, suit at law
the thing spoken of or talked about; event, deed
its use as respect to the MIND alone
reason, the mental faculty of thinking, meditating, reasoning, calculating
account, i.e. regard, consideration
account, i.e. reckoning, score
account, i.e. answer or explanation in reference to judgment
relation, i.e. with whom as judge we stand in relation
reason would
reason, cause, ground
Yeah! Strong's directly states that when talking about the mind, which John plainly is, logos means "reason"!
:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
The bible never translates anything, Vowels. Human beings translate, not the bible. The result is an English translation of the bible. All modern translations have the doctrine of those who did the translating embedded within (because there's no way to avoid doing that). That's what makes it profitable to familiarize yourself with the original language, in this case, Greek.
And the fact is, as I've already mentioned without refutation or even response from you, is that the concept of God being reason was a common idea in the Greek world at the time and was a completely familiar concept not only to John the Apostle but also to the church in general as demonstrated by quotes from the likes of Justine Martyr. If you spent any real effort looking for it, such references would not be hard to find. It is anything but a new idea.
No one is asking you to trust me. This is not my mere personal opinion and that's the point of providing references. Fully cited and easily confirmed references to acknowledged experts, both modern and ancient. I'd hate for you to bother looking them up and reading what else they had to say in support of their position on the issue. That would be a travesty! I mean, you might actually learn something! :shocked:
Further, Strong's doesn't contradict the translation. In fact, it directly affirms it! Context is everything. The passage in question uses other terms, the translation of which is not in any sort of dispute, that directly indicate what the proper translation of Logos should be. In fact, the way the English is normally translated would fit better if the Greek word used was Lego rather than Logos. It's a different form of the same word in Greek, which your Strong's will confirm, and if that were the word John had used, then the English translation into "word" would be impossible to dispute. In fact, if you were starting with the King James Bible and translating it into ancient Greek, "Lego" is the word you'd likely use to translate the first chapter of John! If, on the other hand, King James had used "Reason" or "Logic" in place of word, the translation to Greek would be undoubtedly identical to the actual Greek manuscripts.
John's use of the word Logos context of "the light" (i.e. of understanding) and "comprehension", which are clearly mental concepts indicates that "Logic", or even better "Reason", is the correct translation.
Resting in Him,
Clete
I have already explained this from the very first time I engaged you on this. God is, in fact, good! We can therefore know that if He wills it, it's good! But you put it backward! It isn't God's will that makes it good, it's God's will BECAUSE it's good! We can know that its good because its God's will but that's just the cause of our knowledge not of goodness itself. God is righteous because He acts rightly not because his action defines what the word "good" means as He goes along. If that were so, then there would be no way to know that God wasn't lying! There'd be no way to know anything about who God is for that matter.
And thank you for at least admitting that you think the biblical God (the only one that actually exists, by the way) is unjust. Not only that but you actually believe yourself to be wiser than God!
That is truly, truly amazingly blasphemous and beyond offensive.
Take this as your last warning. I will not tolerate it any further. I strongly recommend that you leave the subject alone. Don't defend yourself - don't respond at all if you're smart. Not that you care anything about being on my ignore list but if you wish to continue this discussion, you'll not let me catch a syllable of anything similar to this coming from you again.
Clete
iouae
Well-known member
No I don't think the biblical God (the only one that actually exists, by the way) is unjust.
I don't believe there is a hell in which unbelievers burn for eternity. But it amazes me that folks like you, who spout about a "good" God, and a "logical" God and a "reasonable" God and a God who's logic is to promote life, would consider it possible for God to do worse than the Spanish Inquisition.
You do believe the Spanish Inquisition was wrong don't you, when they tortured poor people, to give them a taste of hell, in order to save their souls.
At least they were ignorant.
At best they had good intentions.
And, thank God, these poor soul's torture only lasted a short while.
But Christians like you, who lecture me about my views of a God who is fickle and can do cruel things - never in my wildest imagination could this God of mine be torturing my unsaved loved one for all eternity, while I am eating of the tree of Life and walking the golden streets.
I asked you this to test you. I absolutely don't believe what you defend, which is a God so cruel, He tortures unbelievers for all eternity. My loving God drops them in the lake of fire (molten lava) where they are burnt up in an instant, even though the fire is eternal, and their smoke rises forever, they, with their consciousness are long gone. Their worm (maggots) may not die in Gehenna, but they have long disappeared. And my good God does not even have Satan and the demons suffer forever, they too will be utterly destroyed in hell fire.
Ezekiel 28:18
therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee.
Eze 28:19
All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more.
So your definition of God being "logical" is useless, since it should be obvious that there could be no "logical" reason to punish either spirits or man eternally.
God's punishment is directed at folks repenting. But these have had their last chance.
And all the rest of us are in heaven, so we don't need to see and fear what might befall us for being naughty.
And who could enjoy eternity knowing someone you love is suffering in hell.
You, and all those thinking this evil thing of God, yet brown-nosing and calling him "good" for your misunderstanding of the doctrine of hell - you beyond amaze me.
Oh shush!
iouae
Well-known member
You clearly don't know how to use Strongs, because here is what Strongs also says...
"The KJV translates Strong's G3056 in the following manner: word (218x), saying (50x), account (8x), speech (8x), Word (Christ) (7x), thing (5x), not translated (2x), miscellaneous (32x)."
It does not translate "logos" as "reason" unless it is among the 32 miscellaneous ways "logos" is translated, which I doubt.
So none of the translators, who knew far more about Greek than you or I do, think that "reason" is a good translation of "logos".
I am not ignoring you Daqq. I did not want to disrupt your thread further so I found another hobby
But on the subject of "ignore"...
I have a memory so I can just remember to ignore someone if I find they have nothing to add to a discussion.
And how many people are on ignore that one needs a list.
I don't even know how one "ignores" someone, and don't feel a need to find out.
Also, if I put them on ignore, might they not be speaking about me without my knowing about it?
If someone says they will put me on their ignore list, I would make a point of speaking about them, including them in my posts. But that is just me
That is the reason for the quote function; so that others will know who you are responding to. Look in my post, look at who I quoted, I was not saying those things to you. Have a nice thread. :wave: