God's attitude towards science and progress

[iouae]

You're a double minded, mealy mouthed fool...
Clete

I try not to set a very high bar for Christians. But the absolute minimum I expect from a Christian is that they have some manners.

 

[iouae]

I was thinking you had something more mystical in mind, where God somehow magically refused to allow the connections of logic to be put together in anyone's mind prior to the Renaissance.

Clete

The only progress God had to retard was knowledge of electricity. Without this, one cannot make nukes.

There were branches of science which have led to recent progress. There would be little knowledge of the atom without electricity.

Economics is not an issue. There has always been money and trade.

 

[JudgeRightly]

I have absolute respect for God, so maybe JR was mistaken, or got carried away.



I think when you examine what I said, I think God is always right, because whatever God thinks IS right, by definition.

See kgov.com/euthyphro.

 

[iouae]

See kgov.com/euthyphro.

I checked it out JudgeRightly

I remember an argument Socrates got into.

Some chap was taking his father to court for killing a slave, and the chap thought his father was wrong. Maybe the chap's name was Euthyphro.

Socrates asked the chap to define right and wrong (piety).

The chap said that piety (right and wrong) is what the Gods approve of.
(This is in fact what I am saying, that right and wrong IS what God approves or disapproves of).

Socrates went on to point out that the Greek Gods war among themselves.

Therefore it must be true that what one god approves of, another disapproves of, for the gods to have this difference of opinion.

Therefore piety cannot be what the gods approve or disapprove of.

Then Socrates, in true style, would ask for another definition of piety....

Here is what the site said...

"...if by His will He decides whether some trait will be good, as though He could have decided otherwise, that appears arbitrary; and if His nature itself is claimed to define goodness itself, then how could God Himself even know whether He were good?"

The very meanings of "grace" and "arbitrary" are similar. God does not care what we think of His arbitrariness as many parables show (e.g. parable of those hired at all times of the day get same wage).

"then how could God Himself even know whether He were good?" - how dumb this sounds, that God has inner conflict, or cares since He is all powerful, what us minions, created beings think of His righteousness. If I as a parent tell my kid to be back before 11pm, I a defining right and wrong. Later is wrong. That's how God defines right and wrong. And, like God, I have no doubt that 11pm is right.

The problem was the Greeks had many gods. When one has one God only, it is easy to see how there can be no conflict - right is as the God defines it. And that God may change His mind. It used to be commanded to swear by God's name, now it is wrong.

 

[iouae]

An example of how God defines right and wrong - take the Sabbath.

All days are just periods of 24 hours.

But one of the days of the week is holy, simply because God says so.

 

[Wick Stick]

An example of how God defines right and wrong - take the Sabbath.

All days are just periods of 24 hours.

But one of the days of the week is holy, simply because God says so.

It's more than that.

In Egypt, the people cried out because they had NO rest. God gave Sabbath so that the people would have a rest. Some 1st century Rabbi said "the Sabbath was made for man" and "man was not made for the Sabbath."

For contrast, in Babylonian religion, man was thought to have been created to work, so that the gods didn't have to work.

The difference couldn't be more stark, don't you think? To this day, this remains a litmus test of false religion: do the people "serve" God, or do they rest and reflect? This is the difference between Babel and Sinai.

 

[iouae]

It's more than that.

In Egypt, the people cried out because they had NO rest. God gave Sabbath so that the people would have a rest. Some 1st century Rabbi said "the Sabbath was made for man" and "man was not made for the Sabbath."

For contrast, in Babylonian religion, man was thought to have been created to work, so that the gods didn't have to work.

The difference couldn't be more stark, don't you think? To this day, this remains a litmus test of false religion: do the people "serve" God, or do they rest and reflect? This is the difference between Babel and Sinai.

I understand what you are saying that the pagan gods had people work for them.

But the same rabbi you quoted, did not break the Sabbath, or declare it null and void. The big 10C seamlessly and eternally are part of both old and new covenants.

Heb 4:9
There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. Gk sabbatismos = keeping a sabbath
Folks in the Millennium will go to church on the Sabbath.

 

[iouae]

Since when was telling a little white lie a capital crime?

When God says it is.

Act 5:1
But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession,
And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles' feet.
But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?
Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.
And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great fear came on all them that heard these things.
And the young men arose, wound him up, and carried him out, and buried him.
And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what was done, came in.
And Peter answered unto her, Tell me whether ye sold the land for so much? And she said, Yea, for so much.
Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? behold, the feet of them which have buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out.
Then fell she down straightway at his feet, and yielded up the ghost: and the young men came in, and found her dead, and, carrying her forth, buried her by her husband.

 

[Wick Stick]

I understand what you are saying that the pagan gods had people work for them.

But the same rabbi you quoted, did not break the Sabbath, or declare it null and void. The big 10C seamlessly and eternally are part of both old and new covenants.

Heb 4:9
There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. Gk sabbatismos = keeping a sabbath
Folks in the Millennium will go to church on the Sabbath.

I was with you right up until "go to church."

One keeps the Sabbath when they regularly do not work every seventh day. Attendance to church is not required by the commandment. On the contrary, the prohibition of long travel makes a centralized worship site impossible.

 

[Wick Stick]

Since when was telling a little white lie a capital crime?

When God says it is.

Act 5:1
But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession,
And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles' feet.
But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?
Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.
And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great fear came on all them that heard these things.
And the young men arose, wound him up, and carried him out, and buried him.
And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what was done, came in.
And Peter answered unto her, Tell me whether ye sold the land for so much? And she said, Yea, for so much.
Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? behold, the feet of them which have buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out.
Then fell she down straightway at his feet, and yielded up the ghost: and the young men came in, and found her dead, and, carrying her forth, buried her by her husband.

This story is poorly understood because cultural norms have changed. Aside from lying, the problem here is that they were attempting to peddle influence. The tradition of the church at that time was to lay up a savings at home, and use it to aid others directly in times of need.

Why then did Ananias lay monies at the feet of the apostles (i.e. in their discretion)? His actions would have set a dangerous precedent, forcing the apostles/church to act as a broker of benevolences, and leaving them beholden to the contributors.

In point of fact, this is how the church does it today, and the church has made itself into such a broker, and indebted itself to its parishioners. In the process, it has lost most of its ability to act independently, and must always consider whether its actions will be.... popular.

 

[iouae]

This story is poorly understood because cultural norms have changed. Aside from lying, the problem here is that they were attempting to peddle influence. The tradition of the church at that time was to lay up a savings at home, and use it to aid others directly in times of need.

Why then did Ananias lay monies at the feet of the apostles (i.e. in their discretion)? His actions would have set a dangerous precedent, forcing the apostles/church to act as a broker of benevolences, and leaving them beholden to the contributors.

In point of fact, this is how the church does it today, and the church has made itself into such a broker, and indebted itself to its parishioners. In the process, it has lost most of its ability to act independently, and must always consider whether its actions will be.... popular.

Well said.

 

[iouae]

I was with you right up until "go to church."

One keeps the Sabbath when they regularly do not work every seventh day. Attendance to church is not required by the commandment. On the contrary, the prohibition of long travel makes a centralized worship site impossible.

I don't want us to lose sight of the big picture here. Every law and every principle which God has laid down in OT or NT has an element of arbitrariness. That is because this is the way God wants it to be done. You give me a law, and I could tell you how we could have a different system. Tithe - why not 1/12? Why have two covenants? Why favour one nation Israel, and then seem to dump them for the last 2000 years?

Far be it from me to find fault.

To use an analogy. Every home has a father and mother and children. But in no two homes do the parents do the same amount of work. In some homes one parent does 90% of the work.

All children in different homes are treated differently - at the discretion of the parents. Likewise God rules His family at His discretion. Just as in your family there is no right person to take out the garbage or walk the dog, but someone has to do it. And in God's system, God gets to decide who does what. God is beholden to nobody, and that we call grace. God does not have to answer to anybody. God will have in His kingdom those He wants, and no magic formula will take the place of that.

I fail to see why folks make a biggie out of that fact. To be God means you do as you please. God gave us life, and if we want more, we comply.

 

[Wick Stick]

I don't want us to lose sight of the big picture here. Every law and every principle which God has laid down in OT or NT has an element of arbitrariness. That is because this is the way God wants it to be done. You give me a law, and I could tell you how we could have a different system. Tithe - why not 1/12? Why have two covenants? Why favour one nation Israel, and then seem to dump them for the last 2000 years?

Far be it from me to find fault.

To use an analogy. Every home has a father and mother and children. But in no two homes do the parents do the same amount of work. In some homes one parent does 90% of the work.

All children in different homes are treated differently - at the discretion of the parents. Likewise God rules His family at His discretion. Just as in your family there is no right person to take out the garbage or walk the dog, but someone has to do it. And in God's system, God gets to decide who does what. God is beholden to nobody, and that we call grace. God does not have to answer to anybody. God will have in His kingdom those He wants, and no magic formula will take the place of that.

I fail to see why folks make a biggie out of that fact. To be God means you do as you please. God gave us life, and if we want more, we comply.

You're talking about sovereignty. God is sovereign, and I have no issue with that.

However, as you attempt to show God's sovereignty, you repeatedly give examples where God acts in an arbitrary manner, or at His whim. These do not correlate; not really.

For a child, his parents' actions may seem arbitrary. And that because-I-said-so type of authority may appear to the child to be sovereignty, (or freedom, or whatever name you want to put on a special level of privilege reserved to someone simply because of their station.) But that is only the child's perspective.

From the vantage-point of the parent, there is a rhyme and reason to everything I require of my son. However, it is often difficult/impossible to explain WHY. The reason may be based on 3 other things that the child also does not know. Now I have to explain four things, before he will obey? No... he needs to do it, and now... because-I-said-so.

Likewise, I find that none of God's commands are arbitrary, or on-a-whim. What is commanded is consistently commanded in accordance with what is good, what is profitable. I may not understand why. God may not explain why. I may need a few other lessons before I can even begin to understand why.

But, rest assured - it is not arbitrary; there is a reason. God is a God of Order.

 

[Clete]

If God wants to have his Son born so that it appears He is born out of wedlock, have the pregnant Mary travel a long journey to Bethlehem, have the child born in a manger, have the child threatened with murder by Herod - I might not have done it that way, but I am always in agreement with what God does.

If God wants to have his only beloved Son scourged, spat upon, striped naked and crucified, after his Son begged to not go through with this - I definitely would not have done it that way. But that's just me.

You are not a Christian. If you think you are, you'd better think again. I've never even heard anything so blasphemously insolent as what you said in this post. I can't hardly wait to hear you explain yourself on judgment day.

Back to the ignore list for you.

 

[iouae]

You are not a Christian. If you think you are, you'd better think again. I've never even heard anything so blasphemously insolent as what you said in this post. I can't hardly wait to hear you explain yourself on judgment day.

Back to the ignore list for you.

Clete, you are like a toddler who cannot keep up with a big boy conversation, so you just throw a tantrum.
If you have an ignore list, then you have a problem, other than very bad manners for a Christian.

 

[iouae]

Likewise, I find that none of God's commands are arbitrary, or on-a-whim. What is commanded is consistently commanded in accordance with what is good, what is profitable. I may not understand why. God may not explain why. I may need a few other lessons before I can even begin to understand why.

But, rest assured - it is not arbitrary; there is a reason. God is a God of Order.

We got onto this topic when I said, mankind has no rights - and I still say it.
And whatever God decides to do IS right by definition AND because it's His universe, and His plan, and it is unfolding the way He wants it to unfold.

If Jesus were in control, it would unfold another way, and if Jesus were sovereign, the ultimate say in the universe, then that would be what is right, by definition.

And if iouae was in control and sovereign of this universe, and if I had created everything in it and sustained it, what I said would go, and would be right, by definition.

There is no such concept as "good" or "right" except as is decreed by the one with total control.

As it so happens, I don't have a problem with how God does things. That is why I am His slave (doulas) and I have zero rights as such. I just continually crave His grace and am thankful to have a part in His long term plan.

And if I did not like the only game in town, I could go to hell.

 

[Clete]

Clete, you are like a toddler who cannot keep up with a big boy conversation, so you just throw a tantrum.
If you have an ignore list, then you have a problem, other than very bad manners for a Christian.

The only problem I have is with people who either waste my time or pretend to be Christians while proclaiming themselves wiser than God. You do both.

I won't be responding to you now except to ridicule and to point out your blasphemy. It is the only thing left with any hope of producing good fruit.

 

[Clete]

We got onto this topic when I said, mankind has no rights - and I still say it.
And whatever God decides to do IS right by definition AND because it's His universe, and His plan, and it is unfolding the way He wants it to unfold.

If Jesus were in control, it would unfold another way, and if Jesus were sovereign, the ultimate say in the universe, then that would be what is right, by definition.

And if iouae was in control and sovereign of this universe, and if I had created everything in it and sustained it, what I said would go, and would be right, by definition.

There is no such concept as "good" or "right" except as is decreed by the one with total control.

As it so happens, I don't have a problem with how God does things. That is why I am His slave (doulas) and I have zero rights as such. I just continually crave His grace and am thankful to have a part in His long term plan.

And if I did not like the only game in town, I could go to hell.

This entire post from beginning to end is blasphemy. You worship an amoral figment of your imagination.

 

[iouae]

This entire post from beginning to end is blasphemy. You worship an amoral figment of your imagination.

Oh shush.

 

[iouae]

The only problem I have is with people who either waste my time or pretend to be Christians while proclaiming themselves wiser than God. You do both.

I won't be responding to you now except to ridicule and to point out your blasphemy. It is the only thing left with any hope of producing good fruit.

Why don't you try something new - like formulating a well thought out argument without name calling?