Jump to content
Sal's RuneScape Forum
Gnostic Christian Bishop

Was Satan wrong to demand equal rights in heaven?

Recommended Posts

Was Satan wrong to demand equal rights in heaven?

 

Heaven, from what we can speculate, seems to be a system that some would call a tyranny as no one was allowed to question anything or ask for change in leadership or policies.

 

Was Satan and the third of angels who rejected tyranny wrong to demand equal rights, and if so, are all people who demand equal rights on earth also doing something satanic?

 

Is this why most religions are reluctant to give women and gays equality? Do Christians and Muslims think equality to be evil and satanic?

 

Do religious people think that their Gods frown on the notions of equality of all people and is that why believers deny women and gays equality?

 

Regards

DL

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought everyone did have equal rights in heaven, as it should be on earth. I have a problem with you calling heaven a tyranny too - that just doesn't make sense from a Christian standpoint.

 

Tyranny means for unjust or abusive/oppressive power. The Christian sentiments of heaven explain it as a place with equality and fairness. Are you calling it tyranny because only one being (God) is in charge? If so, that is bringing in a man-made system of governance into a higher power's realm. You can't compare politics in heaven with politics on earth - it doesn't work that way.

 

Since the Christian idea is that God, in the first place, made everything, why would we then define his rule as a tyranny? Do you understand how that makes no sense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God is omnipotent, people and angels are not. It's only natural then that he would have all the power over heaven.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is this why most religions are reluctant to give women and gays equality? Do Christians and Muslims think equality to be evil and satanic?

 

Do religious people think that their Gods frown on the notions of equality of all people and is that why believers deny women and gays equality?

 

You're overlapping religions, and attempting to use Biblical stories to encompass Muslims. While there is evidence to support Muslims not giving equal treatment to women and gays, it certainly doesn't stem from the fall of Lucifer. For that matter, I don't believe the Church's view on gays and women stemmed from the fall of Lucifer, unless you're attempting to argue subconscious. The fall of Lucifer is rarely, if ever, spoken of in any mass readings, so unless all Christians read the Bible (or just specifically that passage) and interpret it the way you do (which let's be real, who in the world does), then no, it is not because of Satan that Christians (or all religious people since you enveloped them all) mistreat women and gays.

 

Note: Women are treated equally for the most part in the Christian faith. For many denominations, women can become ministers (is that the correct term?) the way men can. Gays...a different story but progress is being made, nobody can argue that (at least in western culture).

 

Also, yes Satan was wrong to demand equal rights (watch me argue like you right here).

 

Isiah 14:12-14 Satan said "I will exalt my throne above the stars of God... I will be like the Most High."

How can he be like the most high when the most high is most high?

 

Fin.

Edited by The Skiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Loaded question. Satan was cast out even before he led Adam and Eve to sin. The bible says nothing about Satan in connection with LGBT issues. I'm happy to debate LGBT issues in the context of the bible, but not like this.

Edited by reepicheep

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought everyone did have equal rights in heaven, as it should be on earth. I have a problem with you calling heaven a tyranny too - that just doesn't make sense from a Christian standpoint.

 

Tyranny means for unjust or abusive/oppressive power. The Christian sentiments of heaven explain it as a place with equality and fairness. Are you calling it tyranny because only one being (God) is in charge? If so, that is bringing in a man-made system of governance into a higher power's realm. You can't compare politics in heaven with politics on earth - it doesn't work that way.

 

Since the Christian idea is that God, in the first place, made everything, why would we then define his rule as a tyranny? Do you understand how that makes no sense?

 

I am told by theists that once in heaven, evil thoughts are not allowed. That is mind control and that is tyranny. Paul also spoke of only two options for us. Slaved to sin or slaved to God.

 

As to not being able to compare earth to heaven. you forgotten that God is to bring his government to earth at the end times?

 

When he does because of what his bible says, women and gays will never have equality nor will we ever be able to criticize anything God decrees.

 

That is scary as he would have us stone our own unruly children as well as many more.

 

Do you want his tyranny here on earth?

 

Regards

DL

 

 

God is omnipotent, people and angels are not. It's only natural then that he would have all the power over heaven.

 

If God was all powerful, then he would be able to reproduce true instead of having to cuckold a man and covet his woman. Quite the sinner that God.

 

Dogma is good but you should try thinking. If God had all the power and kept it, we would not even be here.

 

Regards

DL

 

 

 

Is this why most religions are reluctant to give women and gays equality? Do Christians and Muslims think equality to be evil and satanic?

 

Do religious people think that their Gods frown on the notions of equality of all people and is that why believers deny women and gays equality?

 

You're overlapping religions, and attempting to use Biblical stories to encompass Muslims. While there is evidence to support Muslims not giving equal treatment to women and gays, it certainly doesn't stem from the fall of Lucifer. For that matter, I don't believe the Church's view on gays and women stemmed from the fall of Lucifer, unless you're attempting to argue subconscious. The fall of Lucifer is rarely, if ever, spoken of in any mass readings, so unless all Christians read the Bible (or just specifically that passage) and interpret it the way you do (which let's be real, who in the world does), then no, it is not because of Satan that Christians (or all religious people since you enveloped them all) mistreat women and gays.

 

Note: Women are treated equally for the most part in the Christian faith. For many denominations, women can become ministers (is that the correct term?) the way men can. Gays...a different story but progress is being made, nobody can argue that (at least in western culture).

 

Also, yes Satan was wrong to demand equal rights (watch me argue like you right here).

 

Isiah 14:12-14 Satan said "I will exalt my throne above the stars of God... I will be like the Most High."

How can he be like the most high when the most high is most high?

 

Fin.

 

The same way you and I can if you believe Jesus.

 

Matthew 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

 

John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

 

Luke 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

 

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

 

 

A & E became as Gods in the moral sense. That is the important part of being God is it not?

 

If his laws are not the most important part then he is not worthy of man and we should create a new one just as we created him.

 

Regards

DL

 

 

 

 

Loaded question. Satan was cast out even before he led Adam and Eve to sin. The bible says nothing about Satan in connection with LGBT issues. I'm happy to debate LGBT issues in the context of the bible, but not like this.

 

I never mentioned anything of LGBT.

 

Although they too have been discriminated and denigrated by the mainstream religious without a just cause.

 

The religious are more immoral than atheist in this regard.

 

Christian from the U.S. even promoted and financially supported the kill the gays bill in Uganda. Christianity again has innocent blood on their hands.

 

Regards

DL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I never mentioned anything of LGBT.

 

Is this why most religions are reluctant to give women and gays equality? Do Christians and Muslims think equality to be evil and satanic? Do religious people think that their Gods frown on the notions of equality of all people and is that why believers deny women and gays equality?

Okay, you also mentioned women's rights.

Edited by reepicheep

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought everyone did have equal rights in heaven, as it should be on earth. I have a problem with you calling heaven a tyranny too - that just doesn't make sense from a Christian standpoint.

 

Tyranny means for unjust or abusive/oppressive power. The Christian sentiments of heaven explain it as a place with equality and fairness. Are you calling it tyranny because only one being (God) is in charge? If so, that is bringing in a man-made system of governance into a higher power's realm. You can't compare politics in heaven with politics on earth - it doesn't work that way.

 

Since the Christian idea is that God, in the first place, made everything, why would we then define his rule as a tyranny? Do you understand how that makes no sense?

 

I am told by theists that once in heaven, evil thoughts are not allowed. That is mind control and that is tyranny. Paul also spoke of only two options for us. Slaved to sin or slaved to God.

 

As to not being able to compare earth to heaven. you forgotten that God is to bring his government to earth at the end times?

 

When he does because of what his bible says, women and gays will never have equality nor will we ever be able to criticize anything God decrees.

 

That is scary as he would have us stone our own unruly children as well as many more.

 

Do you want his tyranny here on earth?

 

Regards

DL

 

We must have different ideas then. I've never heard that evil thoughts are disallowed, but I've heard that there is no reason for evil thinking in heaven. Even if you're right (which you're not, because it's completely open to interpretation) that doesn't mean it's tyranny.

 

Paul's quotation is a different problem to tackle. You're taking his words too literally - in one thread previously you argued that people use the words of the Bible to construe their own opinions. Who is to say Paul means that we would literally become slaves of God? In all the sermons I've been a part of, the term "slave of God" isn't meant in a derogatory sense. I have much doubt that God, in all his magnificence, has need for slaves, so let's not look at it so literally, right? It simply means that we are preachers of his word, prophets of his greatness. He's not whipping us with a stick if we choose to disobey - wait, didn't you already say that your mind is controlled in heaven? Doesn't that mean we, by His design, cannot disobey?

 

Moving on..

 

I still believe it's unfair to compare earth to heaven, but perhaps I should have worded it clearer in the first post. Politics on earth shouldn't influence politics in heaven. BUT, politics in heaven should and definitely impact politics on earth. (Be that moral politics, government politics, etc). When God is said to bring his governance to earth in the end times, he's doing so for the sake of everyone. He's literally saving everyone. That's hardly something to be disagreeable with.

 

As for your final point, I still stand by my belief that his rule isn't a tyranny. Look up the definition for that term, it doesn't apply to the Christian faith in my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought everyone did have equal rights in heaven, as it should be on earth. I have a problem with you calling heaven a tyranny too - that just doesn't make sense from a Christian standpoint.

 

Tyranny means for unjust or abusive/oppressive power. The Christian sentiments of heaven explain it as a place with equality and fairness. Are you calling it tyranny because only one being (God) is in charge? If so, that is bringing in a man-made system of governance into a higher power's realm. You can't compare politics in heaven with politics on earth - it doesn't work that way.

 

Since the Christian idea is that God, in the first place, made everything, why would we then define his rule as a tyranny? Do you understand how that makes no sense?

 

I am told by theists that once in heaven, evil thoughts are not allowed. That is mind control and that is tyranny. Paul also spoke of only two options for us. Slaved to sin or slaved to God.

 

As to not being able to compare earth to heaven. you forgotten that God is to bring his government to earth at the end times?

 

When he does because of what his bible says, women and gays will never have equality nor will we ever be able to criticize anything God decrees.

 

That is scary as he would have us stone our own unruly children as well as many more.

 

Do you want his tyranny here on earth?

 

Regards

DL

 

We must have different ideas then. I've never heard that evil thoughts are disallowed, but I've heard that there is no reason for evil thinking in heaven. Even if you're right (which you're not, because it's completely open to interpretation) that doesn't mean it's tyranny.

 

Paul's quotation is a different problem to tackle. You're taking his words too literally - in one thread previously you argued that people use the words of the Bible to construe their own opinions. Who is to say Paul means that we would literally become slaves of God? In all the sermons I've been a part of, the term "slave of God" isn't meant in a derogatory sense. I have much doubt that God, in all his magnificence, has need for slaves, so let's not look at it so literally, right? It simply means that we are preachers of his word, prophets of his greatness. He's not whipping us with a stick if we choose to disobey - wait, didn't you already say that your mind is controlled in heaven? Doesn't that mean we, by His design, cannot disobey?

 

Moving on..

 

I still believe it's unfair to compare earth to heaven, but perhaps I should have worded it clearer in the first post. Politics on earth shouldn't influence politics in heaven. BUT, politics in heaven should and definitely impact politics on earth. (Be that moral politics, government politics, etc). When God is said to bring his governance to earth in the end times, he's doing so for the sake of everyone. He's literally saving everyone. That's hardly something to be disagreeable with.

 

As for your final point, I still stand by my belief that his rule isn't a tyranny. Look up the definition for that term, it doesn't apply to the Christian faith in my mind.

It's a tyranny in the sense that the ruler of a celestial dictatorship is a tyrant.

 

I don't agree with not having a say in how I will be governed/ruled somehow I'll be for an eternity.

Edited by 20000_Posts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought everyone did have equal rights in heaven, as it should be on earth. I have a problem with you calling heaven a tyranny too - that just doesn't make sense from a Christian standpoint.

 

Tyranny means for unjust or abusive/oppressive power. The Christian sentiments of heaven explain it as a place with equality and fairness. Are you calling it tyranny because only one being (God) is in charge? If so, that is bringing in a man-made system of governance into a higher power's realm. You can't compare politics in heaven with politics on earth - it doesn't work that way.

 

Since the Christian idea is that God, in the first place, made everything, why would we then define his rule as a tyranny? Do you understand how that makes no sense?

 

I am told by theists that once in heaven, evil thoughts are not allowed. That is mind control and that is tyranny. Paul also spoke of only two options for us. Slaved to sin or slaved to God.

 

As to not being able to compare earth to heaven. you forgotten that God is to bring his government to earth at the end times?

 

When he does because of what his bible says, women and gays will never have equality nor will we ever be able to criticize anything God decrees.

 

That is scary as he would have us stone our own unruly children as well as many more.

 

Do you want his tyranny here on earth?

 

Regards

DL

 

We must have different ideas then. I've never heard that evil thoughts are disallowed, but I've heard that there is no reason for evil thinking in heaven. Even if you're right (which you're not, because it's completely open to interpretation) that doesn't mean it's tyranny.

 

Paul's quotation is a different problem to tackle. You're taking his words too literally - in one thread previously you argued that people use the words of the Bible to construe their own opinions. Who is to say Paul means that we would literally become slaves of God? In all the sermons I've been a part of, the term "slave of God" isn't meant in a derogatory sense. I have much doubt that God, in all his magnificence, has need for slaves, so let's not look at it so literally, right? It simply means that we are preachers of his word, prophets of his greatness. He's not whipping us with a stick if we choose to disobey - wait, didn't you already say that your mind is controlled in heaven? Doesn't that mean we, by His design, cannot disobey?

 

Moving on..

 

I still believe it's unfair to compare earth to heaven, but perhaps I should have worded it clearer in the first post. Politics on earth shouldn't influence politics in heaven. BUT, politics in heaven should and definitely impact politics on earth. (Be that moral politics, government politics, etc). When God is said to bring his governance to earth in the end times, he's doing so for the sake of everyone. He's literally saving everyone. That's hardly something to be disagreeable with.

 

As for your final point, I still stand by my belief that his rule isn't a tyranny. Look up the definition for that term, it doesn't apply to the Christian faith in my mind.

It's a tyranny in the sense that the ruler of a celestial dictatorship is a tyrant.

 

I don't agree with not having a say in how I will be governed/ruled somehow I'll be for an eternity.

Eh, we're arguing about conjecture here, but theoretically shouldn't those who go to heaven be those of a faith who wouldn't mind the rules imposed on them, and wouldn't see them as such? When does a law stop being a law if everyone is willingly following it? Doesn't that just make it just a "moral" again, no law needed since breaking that moral won't happen?

 

Maybe I'm too tired, I'll revisit this later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought everyone did have equal rights in heaven, as it should be on earth. I have a problem with you calling heaven a tyranny too - that just doesn't make sense from a Christian standpoint.

 

Tyranny means for unjust or abusive/oppressive power. The Christian sentiments of heaven explain it as a place with equality and fairness. Are you calling it tyranny because only one being (God) is in charge? If so, that is bringing in a man-made system of governance into a higher power's realm. You can't compare politics in heaven with politics on earth - it doesn't work that way.

 

Since the Christian idea is that God, in the first place, made everything, why would we then define his rule as a tyranny? Do you understand how that makes no sense?

 

I am told by theists that once in heaven, evil thoughts are not allowed. That is mind control and that is tyranny. Paul also spoke of only two options for us. Slaved to sin or slaved to God.

 

As to not being able to compare earth to heaven. you forgotten that God is to bring his government to earth at the end times?

 

When he does because of what his bible says, women and gays will never have equality nor will we ever be able to criticize anything God decrees.

 

That is scary as he would have us stone our own unruly children as well as many more.

 

Do you want his tyranny here on earth?

 

Regards

DL

 

We must have different ideas then. I've never heard that evil thoughts are disallowed, but I've heard that there is no reason for evil thinking in heaven. Even if you're right (which you're not, because it's completely open to interpretation) that doesn't mean it's tyranny.

 

Paul's quotation is a different problem to tackle. You're taking his words too literally - in one thread previously you argued that people use the words of the Bible to construe their own opinions. Who is to say Paul means that we would literally become slaves of God? In all the sermons I've been a part of, the term "slave of God" isn't meant in a derogatory sense. I have much doubt that God, in all his magnificence, has need for slaves, so let's not look at it so literally, right? It simply means that we are preachers of his word, prophets of his greatness. He's not whipping us with a stick if we choose to disobey - wait, didn't you already say that your mind is controlled in heaven? Doesn't that mean we, by His design, cannot disobey?

 

Moving on..

 

I still believe it's unfair to compare earth to heaven, but perhaps I should have worded it clearer in the first post. Politics on earth shouldn't influence politics in heaven. BUT, politics in heaven should and definitely impact politics on earth. (Be that moral politics, government politics, etc). When God is said to bring his governance to earth in the end times, he's doing so for the sake of everyone. He's literally saving everyone. That's hardly something to be disagreeable with.

 

As for your final point, I still stand by my belief that his rule isn't a tyranny. Look up the definition for that term, it doesn't apply to the Christian faith in my mind.

It's a tyranny in the sense that the ruler of a celestial dictatorship is a tyrant.

 

I don't agree with not having a say in how I will be governed/ruled somehow I'll be for an eternity.

This whole line of debate is moot though, because either God is a tyrant or He is not, and either you believe He is one, or you don't. The first can't be proven either way and for the second we'd need to start throwing scripture around and I don't think anybody benefits from that :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I never mentioned anything of LGBT.

 

Is this why most religions are reluctant to give women and gays equality? Do Christians and Muslims think equality to be evil and satanic? Do religious people think that their Gods frown on the notions of equality of all people and is that why believers deny women and gays equality?

Okay, you also mentioned women's rights.

 

Oops. My bad. I must slow down.

 

Regards

DL

 

I always thought everyone did have equal rights in heaven, as it should be on earth. I have a problem with you calling heaven a tyranny too - that just doesn't make sense from a Christian standpoint.

 

Tyranny means for unjust or abusive/oppressive power. The Christian sentiments of heaven explain it as a place with equality and fairness. Are you calling it tyranny because only one being (God) is in charge? If so, that is bringing in a man-made system of governance into a higher power's realm. You can't compare politics in heaven with politics on earth - it doesn't work that way.

 

Since the Christian idea is that God, in the first place, made everything, why would we then define his rule as a tyranny? Do you understand how that makes no sense?

 

I am told by theists that once in heaven, evil thoughts are not allowed. That is mind control and that is tyranny. Paul also spoke of only two options for us. Slaved to sin or slaved to God.

 

As to not being able to compare earth to heaven. you forgotten that God is to bring his government to earth at the end times?

 

When he does because of what his bible says, women and gays will never have equality nor will we ever be able to criticize anything God decrees.

 

That is scary as he would have us stone our own unruly children as well as many more.

 

Do you want his tyranny here on earth?

 

Regards

DL

 

We must have different ideas then. I've never heard that evil thoughts are disallowed, but I've heard that there is no reason for evil thinking in heaven. Even if you're right (which you're not, because it's completely open to interpretation) that doesn't mean it's tyranny.

 

Paul's quotation is a different problem to tackle. You're taking his words too literally - in one thread previously you argued that people use the words of the Bible to construe their own opinions. Who is to say Paul means that we would literally become slaves of God? In all the sermons I've been a part of, the term "slave of God" isn't meant in a derogatory sense. I have much doubt that God, in all his magnificence, has need for slaves, so let's not look at it so literally, right? It simply means that we are preachers of his word, prophets of his greatness. He's not whipping us with a stick if we choose to disobey - wait, didn't you already say that your mind is controlled in heaven? Doesn't that mean we, by His design, cannot disobey?

 

Moving on..

 

I still believe it's unfair to compare earth to heaven, but perhaps I should have worded it clearer in the first post. Politics on earth shouldn't influence politics in heaven. BUT, politics in heaven should and definitely impact politics on earth. (Be that moral politics, government politics, etc). When God is said to bring his governance to earth in the end times, he's doing so for the sake of everyone. He's literally saving everyone. That's hardly something to be disagreeable with.

 

As for your final point, I still stand by my belief that his rule isn't a tyranny. Look up the definition for that term, it doesn't apply to the Christian faith in my mind.

 

LOL. Sure, he is saving everyone. After condemning us. The prick is saving us from himself.

 

You say you are not slaved to God in heaven. Can you disagree with him on anything and live?

 

Luke 19:27 But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.

 

Regards

DL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LOL. Sure, he is saving everyone. After condemning us. The prick is saving us from himself.

 

Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God

 

John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

 

Romans 10:9 Because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

 

John 3:15 That whoever believes in him may have eternal life.

 

 

 

You're pulling Biblical quotes out of context.

 

Luke 19:27 But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.

 

Is from a parable Jesus told the people about a nobleman. The quotes comes from what the nobleman said.

 

Luke 19:11 Jesus went on to tell a parable, because He was near Jerusalem, and they supposed that the kingdom of God was going to appear immediately.

 

The following of Luke 19:12 - 19:27 is a parable Jesus is telling about a nobleman. Jesus did not say that quote himself, it was the words of a nobleman who was a character in a story Jesus was telling to teach a lesson. The nobleman did not represent God or Jesus in any way.

 

Stop pulling quotes without context.

Edited by The Skiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought everyone did have equal rights in heaven, as it should be on earth. I have a problem with you calling heaven a tyranny too - that just doesn't make sense from a Christian standpoint.

 

Tyranny means for unjust or abusive/oppressive power. The Christian sentiments of heaven explain it as a place with equality and fairness. Are you calling it tyranny because only one being (God) is in charge? If so, that is bringing in a man-made system of governance into a higher power's realm. You can't compare politics in heaven with politics on earth - it doesn't work that way.

 

Since the Christian idea is that God, in the first place, made everything, why would we then define his rule as a tyranny? Do you understand how that makes no sense?

 

I am told by theists that once in heaven, evil thoughts are not allowed. That is mind control and that is tyranny. Paul also spoke of only two options for us. Slaved to sin or slaved to God.

 

As to not being able to compare earth to heaven. you forgotten that God is to bring his government to earth at the end times?

 

When he does because of what his bible says, women and gays will never have equality nor will we ever be able to criticize anything God decrees.

 

That is scary as he would have us stone our own unruly children as well as many more.

 

Do you want his tyranny here on earth?

 

Regards

DL

 

We must have different ideas then. I've never heard that evil thoughts are disallowed, but I've heard that there is no reason for evil thinking in heaven. Even if you're right (which you're not, because it's completely open to interpretation) that doesn't mean it's tyranny.

 

Paul's quotation is a different problem to tackle. You're taking his words too literally - in one thread previously you argued that people use the words of the Bible to construe their own opinions. Who is to say Paul means that we would literally become slaves of God? In all the sermons I've been a part of, the term "slave of God" isn't meant in a derogatory sense. I have much doubt that God, in all his magnificence, has need for slaves, so let's not look at it so literally, right? It simply means that we are preachers of his word, prophets of his greatness. He's not whipping us with a stick if we choose to disobey - wait, didn't you already say that your mind is controlled in heaven? Doesn't that mean we, by His design, cannot disobey?

 

Moving on..

 

I still believe it's unfair to compare earth to heaven, but perhaps I should have worded it clearer in the first post. Politics on earth shouldn't influence politics in heaven. BUT, politics in heaven should and definitely impact politics on earth. (Be that moral politics, government politics, etc). When God is said to bring his governance to earth in the end times, he's doing so for the sake of everyone. He's literally saving everyone. That's hardly something to be disagreeable with.

 

As for your final point, I still stand by my belief that his rule isn't a tyranny. Look up the definition for that term, it doesn't apply to the Christian faith in my mind.

It's a tyranny in the sense that the ruler of a celestial dictatorship is a tyrant.

 

I don't agree with not having a say in how I will be governed/ruled somehow I'll be for an eternity.

Eh, we're arguing about conjecture here, but theoretically shouldn't those who go to heaven be those of a faith who wouldn't mind the rules imposed on them, and wouldn't see them as such? When does a law stop being a law if everyone is willingly following it? Doesn't that just make it just a "moral" again, no law needed since breaking that moral won't happen?

 

Maybe I'm too tired, I'll revisit this later.

Well the options are follow a tyrant or go to hell. I'm sure there's plenty of people that would follow something if only because the view the alternative to be worse (see the Paschal's Wager thread). Morals and laws are independent, almost any law can be broken and morally justified. Additionally, morality is a very gray area and requires questioning and discussion as is found in Western philosophies. Living in a world where everything is already morally decided strips you of all freedom and ability.

 

 

I always thought everyone did have equal rights in heaven, as it should be on earth. I have a problem with you calling heaven a tyranny too - that just doesn't make sense from a Christian standpoint.

 

Tyranny means for unjust or abusive/oppressive power. The Christian sentiments of heaven explain it as a place with equality and fairness. Are you calling it tyranny because only one being (God) is in charge? If so, that is bringing in a man-made system of governance into a higher power's realm. You can't compare politics in heaven with politics on earth - it doesn't work that way.

 

Since the Christian idea is that God, in the first place, made everything, why would we then define his rule as a tyranny? Do you understand how that makes no sense?

 

I am told by theists that once in heaven, evil thoughts are not allowed. That is mind control and that is tyranny. Paul also spoke of only two options for us. Slaved to sin or slaved to God.

 

As to not being able to compare earth to heaven. you forgotten that God is to bring his government to earth at the end times?

 

When he does because of what his bible says, women and gays will never have equality nor will we ever be able to criticize anything God decrees.

 

That is scary as he would have us stone our own unruly children as well as many more.

 

Do you want his tyranny here on earth?

 

Regards

DL

 

We must have different ideas then. I've never heard that evil thoughts are disallowed, but I've heard that there is no reason for evil thinking in heaven. Even if you're right (which you're not, because it's completely open to interpretation) that doesn't mean it's tyranny.

 

Paul's quotation is a different problem to tackle. You're taking his words too literally - in one thread previously you argued that people use the words of the Bible to construe their own opinions. Who is to say Paul means that we would literally become slaves of God? In all the sermons I've been a part of, the term "slave of God" isn't meant in a derogatory sense. I have much doubt that God, in all his magnificence, has need for slaves, so let's not look at it so literally, right? It simply means that we are preachers of his word, prophets of his greatness. He's not whipping us with a stick if we choose to disobey - wait, didn't you already say that your mind is controlled in heaven? Doesn't that mean we, by His design, cannot disobey?

 

Moving on..

 

I still believe it's unfair to compare earth to heaven, but perhaps I should have worded it clearer in the first post. Politics on earth shouldn't influence politics in heaven. BUT, politics in heaven should and definitely impact politics on earth. (Be that moral politics, government politics, etc). When God is said to bring his governance to earth in the end times, he's doing so for the sake of everyone. He's literally saving everyone. That's hardly something to be disagreeable with.

 

As for your final point, I still stand by my belief that his rule isn't a tyranny. Look up the definition for that term, it doesn't apply to the Christian faith in my mind.

It's a tyranny in the sense that the ruler of a celestial dictatorship is a tyrant.

 

I don't agree with not having a say in how I will be governed/ruled somehow I'll be for an eternity.

This whole line of debate is moot though, because either God is a tyrant or He is not, and either you believe He is one, or you don't. The first can't be proven either way and for the second we'd need to start throwing scripture around and I don't think anybody benefits from that :P

If god were to exist, he would be a tyrant.

 

This hypothesis is not moot, as it can be judged by the descriptions of god which are conveniently found in scripture.

The fact that you can be convicted of thought crime, must love and fear the ruler, and that you would not know right from wrong if it weren't for dear leader are all strikingly similar to what we would describe as a tyrant.

 

Satan apparently made a good call questioning the dictatorship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought everyone did have equal rights in heaven, as it should be on earth. I have a problem with you calling heaven a tyranny too - that just doesn't make sense from a Christian standpoint.

 

Tyranny means for unjust or abusive/oppressive power. The Christian sentiments of heaven explain it as a place with equality and fairness. Are you calling it tyranny because only one being (God) is in charge? If so, that is bringing in a man-made system of governance into a higher power's realm. You can't compare politics in heaven with politics on earth - it doesn't work that way.

 

Since the Christian idea is that God, in the first place, made everything, why would we then define his rule as a tyranny? Do you understand how that makes no sense?

 

I am told by theists that once in heaven, evil thoughts are not allowed. That is mind control and that is tyranny. Paul also spoke of only two options for us. Slaved to sin or slaved to God.

 

As to not being able to compare earth to heaven. you forgotten that God is to bring his government to earth at the end times?

 

When he does because of what his bible says, women and gays will never have equality nor will we ever be able to criticize anything God decrees.

 

That is scary as he would have us stone our own unruly children as well as many more.

 

Do you want his tyranny here on earth?

 

Regards

DL

 

We must have different ideas then. I've never heard that evil thoughts are disallowed, but I've heard that there is no reason for evil thinking in heaven. Even if you're right (which you're not, because it's completely open to interpretation) that doesn't mean it's tyranny.

 

Paul's quotation is a different problem to tackle. You're taking his words too literally - in one thread previously you argued that people use the words of the Bible to construe their own opinions. Who is to say Paul means that we would literally become slaves of God? In all the sermons I've been a part of, the term "slave of God" isn't meant in a derogatory sense. I have much doubt that God, in all his magnificence, has need for slaves, so let's not look at it so literally, right? It simply means that we are preachers of his word, prophets of his greatness. He's not whipping us with a stick if we choose to disobey - wait, didn't you already say that your mind is controlled in heaven? Doesn't that mean we, by His design, cannot disobey?

 

Moving on..

 

I still believe it's unfair to compare earth to heaven, but perhaps I should have worded it clearer in the first post. Politics on earth shouldn't influence politics in heaven. BUT, politics in heaven should and definitely impact politics on earth. (Be that moral politics, government politics, etc). When God is said to bring his governance to earth in the end times, he's doing so for the sake of everyone. He's literally saving everyone. That's hardly something to be disagreeable with.

 

As for your final point, I still stand by my belief that his rule isn't a tyranny. Look up the definition for that term, it doesn't apply to the Christian faith in my mind.

It's a tyranny in the sense that the ruler of a celestial dictatorship is a tyrant.

 

I don't agree with not having a say in how I will be governed/ruled somehow I'll be for an eternity.

Eh, we're arguing about conjecture here, but theoretically shouldn't those who go to heaven be those of a faith who wouldn't mind the rules imposed on them, and wouldn't see them as such? When does a law stop being a law if everyone is willingly following it? Doesn't that just make it just a "moral" again, no law needed since breaking that moral won't happen?

 

Maybe I'm too tired, I'll revisit this later.

Well the options are follow a tyrant or go to hell. I'm sure there's plenty of people that would follow something if only because the view the alternative to be worse (see the Paschal's Wager thread). Morals and laws are independent, almost any law can be broken and morally justified. Additionally, morality is a very gray area and requires questioning and discussion as is found in Western philosophies. Living in a world where everything is already morally decided strips you of all freedom and ability.

 

 

I always thought everyone did have equal rights in heaven, as it should be on earth. I have a problem with you calling heaven a tyranny too - that just doesn't make sense from a Christian standpoint.

 

Tyranny means for unjust or abusive/oppressive power. The Christian sentiments of heaven explain it as a place with equality and fairness. Are you calling it tyranny because only one being (God) is in charge? If so, that is bringing in a man-made system of governance into a higher power's realm. You can't compare politics in heaven with politics on earth - it doesn't work that way.

 

Since the Christian idea is that God, in the first place, made everything, why would we then define his rule as a tyranny? Do you understand how that makes no sense?

 

I am told by theists that once in heaven, evil thoughts are not allowed. That is mind control and that is tyranny. Paul also spoke of only two options for us. Slaved to sin or slaved to God.

 

As to not being able to compare earth to heaven. you forgotten that God is to bring his government to earth at the end times?

 

When he does because of what his bible says, women and gays will never have equality nor will we ever be able to criticize anything God decrees.

 

That is scary as he would have us stone our own unruly children as well as many more.

 

Do you want his tyranny here on earth?

 

Regards

DL

 

We must have different ideas then. I've never heard that evil thoughts are disallowed, but I've heard that there is no reason for evil thinking in heaven. Even if you're right (which you're not, because it's completely open to interpretation) that doesn't mean it's tyranny.

 

Paul's quotation is a different problem to tackle. You're taking his words too literally - in one thread previously you argued that people use the words of the Bible to construe their own opinions. Who is to say Paul means that we would literally become slaves of God? In all the sermons I've been a part of, the term "slave of God" isn't meant in a derogatory sense. I have much doubt that God, in all his magnificence, has need for slaves, so let's not look at it so literally, right? It simply means that we are preachers of his word, prophets of his greatness. He's not whipping us with a stick if we choose to disobey - wait, didn't you already say that your mind is controlled in heaven? Doesn't that mean we, by His design, cannot disobey?

 

Moving on..

 

I still believe it's unfair to compare earth to heaven, but perhaps I should have worded it clearer in the first post. Politics on earth shouldn't influence politics in heaven. BUT, politics in heaven should and definitely impact politics on earth. (Be that moral politics, government politics, etc). When God is said to bring his governance to earth in the end times, he's doing so for the sake of everyone. He's literally saving everyone. That's hardly something to be disagreeable with.

 

As for your final point, I still stand by my belief that his rule isn't a tyranny. Look up the definition for that term, it doesn't apply to the Christian faith in my mind.

It's a tyranny in the sense that the ruler of a celestial dictatorship is a tyrant.

 

I don't agree with not having a say in how I will be governed/ruled somehow I'll be for an eternity.

This whole line of debate is moot though, because either God is a tyrant or He is not, and either you believe He is one, or you don't. The first can't be proven either way and for the second we'd need to start throwing scripture around and I don't think anybody benefits from that :P

If god were to exist, he would be a tyrant.

 

This hypothesis is not moot, as it can be judged by the descriptions of god which are conveniently found in scripture.

The fact that you can be convicted of thought crime, must love and fear the ruler, and that you would not know right from wrong if it weren't for dear leader are all strikingly similar to what we would describe as a tyrant.

 

Satan apparently made a good call questioning the dictatorship.

You call it a tyrant because you ignore the love and the reasoning behind the way he judges. I won't disagree that God is an absolute ruler, but what you call a tyrant I call a fair and just ruler. That's why the hypothesis is moot.

Edited by reepicheep

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LOL. Sure, he is saving everyone. After condemning us. The prick is saving us from himself.

 

Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God

 

John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

 

Romans 10:9 Because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

 

John 3:15 That whoever believes in him may have eternal life.

 

 

 

You're pulling Biblical quotes out of context.

 

Luke 19:27 But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.

 

Is from a parable Jesus told the people about a nobleman. The quotes comes from what the nobleman said.

 

Luke 19:11 Jesus went on to tell a parable, because He was near Jerusalem, and they supposed that the kingdom of God was going to appear immediately.

 

The following of Luke 19:12 - 19:27 is a parable Jesus is telling about a nobleman. Jesus did not say that quote himself, it was the words of a nobleman who was a character in a story Jesus was telling to teach a lesson. The nobleman did not represent God or Jesus in any way.

 

Stop pulling quotes without context.

 

Stop believing that a genocidal son murderer who can torture and kill babies can somehow be a good God.

 

Stop pulling that dirty God out of your ass and saying he smells good.

 

Lets talk about your satanic God's morals. That is where we will se what kind of God he truly is.

 

You like to keep waving your get into heaven free card as if you earned it in a moral way.

 

Care to engage on that?

 

Shall I take the first shot or do you want to try to justify you, the guilty, trying to profit from the punishment of the innocent?

 

Regards

DL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole line of debate is moot though, because either God is a tyrant or He is not, and either you believe He is one, or you don't. The first can't be proven either way and for the second we'd need to start throwing scripture around and I don't think anybody benefits from that :P

If god were to exist, he would be a tyrant.

 

This hypothesis is not moot, as it can be judged by the descriptions of god which are conveniently found in scripture.

The fact that you can be convicted of thought crime, must love and fear the ruler, and that you would not know right from wrong if it weren't for dear leader are all strikingly similar to what we would describe as a tyrant.

 

Satan apparently made a good call questioning the dictatorship.

You call it a tyrant because you ignore the love and the reasoning behind the way he judges. I won't disagree that God is an absolute ruler, but what you call a tyrant I call a fair and just ruler. That's why the hypothesis is moot.

Sorry, this quote was getting ridiculous, I shortened the part that wasn't relevant.

 

I agree with reep. I think it's really how you look at it.

 

Yeah, God is the main power, no disagreeing with him, he makes all the rules.

 

But classifying him under the definition of tyrant puts him in a category that is riddled with negativity. The definition of tyranny itself has extreme negative connotations. Those going to heaven are those who believe in the greatness and glory of their Lord, so while they have rules imposed on them, these are arguably rules that they desire.

Edited by Chaoss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stop believing that a genocidal son murderer who can torture and kill babies can somehow be a good God.

 

Stop pulling that dirty God out of your ass and saying he smells good.

 

Lets talk about your satanic God's morals. That is where we will se what kind of God he truly is.

 

You like to keep waving your get into heaven free card as if you earned it in a moral way.

 

Care to engage on that?

 

Shall I take the first shot or do you want to try to justify you, the guilty, trying to profit from the punishment of the innocent?

 

Why did you ignore my accusation?

As far as everything you said in the quoted section above:

902debcaf2f23368b452b1ec8ec92b2b.jpg

 

I believe in the New Testament God. I choose to follow the practices that Jesus preached, such as loving thy neighbor. Unless you plan to pull quotes from that section of the Bible and attempt to use them out of context against me, we have nothing to discuss. You take an Old Testament approach which I will admit showcases a much darker God, I follow the teachings of Jesus. We are two separate topics.

 

Interesting that you completely ignored the fact that you were caught pulling quotes out of context to fuel your arguments. You do understand that doing such a thing crumbles the legitimacy of what you're saying, for without the Biblical support you are left with what you have always been: a mad-man spewing a warped interpretation of religion in an attempt to stir chaos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole line of debate is moot though, because either God is a tyrant or He is not, and either you believe He is one, or you don't. The first can't be proven either way and for the second we'd need to start throwing scripture around and I don't think anybody benefits from that :P

If god were to exist, he would be a tyrant.

 

This hypothesis is not moot, as it can be judged by the descriptions of god which are conveniently found in scripture.

The fact that you can be convicted of thought crime, must love and fear the ruler, and that you would not know right from wrong if it weren't for dear leader are all strikingly similar to what we would describe as a tyrant.

 

Satan apparently made a good call questioning the dictatorship.

You call it a tyrant because you ignore the love and the reasoning behind the way he judges. I won't disagree that God is an absolute ruler, but what you call a tyrant I call a fair and just ruler. That's why the hypothesis is moot.

Sorry, this quote was getting ridiculous, I shortened the part that wasn't relevant.

 

I agree with reep. I think it's really how you look at it.

 

Yeah, God is the main power, no disagreeing with him, he makes all the rules.

 

But classifying him under the definition of tyrant puts him in a category that is riddled with negativity. The definition of tyranny itself has extreme negative connotations. Those going to heaven are those who believe in the greatness and glory of their Lord, so while they have rules imposed on them, these are arguably rules that they desire.

You're telling me you can't see people in North Korea saying the exact same thing about their Great and Loving Leader?

 

And when the only other option is burning forever they aren't rules they desire, literally anything will be better. Seems to be setting some low standards.

Edited by 20000_Posts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole line of debate is moot though, because either God is a tyrant or He is not, and either you believe He is one, or you don't. The first can't be proven either way and for the second we'd need to start throwing scripture around and I don't think anybody benefits from that :P

If god were to exist, he would be a tyrant.

 

This hypothesis is not moot, as it can be judged by the descriptions of god which are conveniently found in scripture.

The fact that you can be convicted of thought crime, must love and fear the ruler, and that you would not know right from wrong if it weren't for dear leader are all strikingly similar to what we would describe as a tyrant.

 

Satan apparently made a good call questioning the dictatorship.

You call it a tyrant because you ignore the love and the reasoning behind the way he judges. I won't disagree that God is an absolute ruler, but what you call a tyrant I call a fair and just ruler. That's why the hypothesis is moot.

Sorry, this quote was getting ridiculous, I shortened the part that wasn't relevant.

 

I agree with reep. I think it's really how you look at it.

 

Yeah, God is the main power, no disagreeing with him, he makes all the rules.

 

But classifying him under the definition of tyrant puts him in a category that is riddled with negativity. The definition of tyranny itself has extreme negative connotations. Those going to heaven are those who believe in the greatness and glory of their Lord, so while they have rules imposed on them, these are arguably rules that they desire.

You're telling me you can't see people in North Korea saying the exact same thing about their Great and Loving Leader?

 

And when the only other option is burning forever they aren't rules they desire, literally anything will be better. Seems to be setting some low standards.

The DPRK is a small, sheltered nation, and I don't think comparing their population to the billions who believe in Christ is fair.

 

The thing I've liked about this debate is the different ideas being thrown around. I was raised Christian, but at the moment I'd consider myself more agnostic, perhaps even atheist (suffice to say, I'm confused about my religious identity). As such, I've been trying to argue through my limited knowledge of the Christian faith

 

Comparing what happens in the mind of a Christian compared to an atheist after death, I think your comment is completely backwards. Setting a low standard? No way! They are setting an (impossibly) high standard that there even IS a life after death! And not only is this unfathomable life eternal, but it aligns perfectly with what they liked back on earth!

 

In my opinion, Christians see going to heaven as a positive thing. They like the rules imposed, because it's rules they would have followed anyway. I don't think they are expecting a low standard by saying there is eternal happiness after death, I think that standard is mind-numbingly insanly high compared to an atheist view that you just rot in the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole line of debate is moot though, because either God is a tyrant or He is not, and either you believe He is one, or you don't. The first can't be proven either way and for the second we'd need to start throwing scripture around and I don't think anybody benefits from that :P

If god were to exist, he would be a tyrant.

 

This hypothesis is not moot, as it can be judged by the descriptions of god which are conveniently found in scripture.

The fact that you can be convicted of thought crime, must love and fear the ruler, and that you would not know right from wrong if it weren't for dear leader are all strikingly similar to what we would describe as a tyrant.

 

Satan apparently made a good call questioning the dictatorship.

You call it a tyrant because you ignore the love and the reasoning behind the way he judges. I won't disagree that God is an absolute ruler, but what you call a tyrant I call a fair and just ruler. That's why the hypothesis is moot.

Sorry, this quote was getting ridiculous, I shortened the part that wasn't relevant.

 

I agree with reep. I think it's really how you look at it.

 

Yeah, God is the main power, no disagreeing with him, he makes all the rules.

 

But classifying him under the definition of tyrant puts him in a category that is riddled with negativity. The definition of tyranny itself has extreme negative connotations. Those going to heaven are those who believe in the greatness and glory of their Lord, so while they have rules imposed on them, these are arguably rules that they desire.

You're telling me you can't see people in North Korea saying the exact same thing about their Great and Loving Leader?

 

And when the only other option is burning forever they aren't rules they desire, literally anything will be better. Seems to be setting some low standards.

The DPRK is a small, sheltered nation, and I don't think comparing their population to the billions who believe in Christ is fair.

 

The thing I've liked about this debate is the different ideas being thrown around. I was raised Christian, but at the moment I'd consider myself more agnostic, perhaps even atheist (suffice to say, I'm confused about my religious identity). As such, I've been trying to argue through my limited knowledge of the Christian faith

 

Comparing what happens in the mind of a Christian compared to an atheist after death, I think your comment is completely backwards. Setting a low standard? No way! They are setting an (impossibly) high standard that there even IS a life after death! And not only is this unfathomable life eternal, but it aligns perfectly with what they liked back on earth!

 

In my opinion, Christians see going to heaven as a positive thing. They like the rules imposed, because it's rules they would have followed anyway. I don't think they are expecting a low standard by saying there is eternal happiness after death, I think that standard is mind-numbingly insanly high compared to an atheist view that you just rot in the ground.

Scale doesn't affect totalitarianism. You are correct that on the scale of billions it is a bit more Orwellian, though. ;)

 

I think you misunderstood the point I was trying to make. If we make the assumption that there is a God and a Heaven and a Hell, then there are two options: follow the rules (which are said to be right) or burn forever. You have a group of people that will follow the rules faithfully and nothing will stop them. You have another group that wants nothing to do with the rules and will be tortured forever. But there is a third group that reluctantly follows the rules if only because not doing so will be a far worse fate.

 

So by standard, I am saying that it only has to be better than the absolute worst outcome to be viable for 2 out of 3 of the groups. There will be eternal happiness for the first group, but the final group may not find it as perfect as they would wish. And there's nothing they can do about it because saying anything against the Ruler will have you cast into fire and brimstone.

 

Is this not the exact same of every other totalitarian regime? Does Iran not have faithful supporters, people that want nothing but the government to fall, yet also those that follow along just so they don't face punishment?

 

I reemphasize: a celestial dictatorship.

 

 

Edit: I also do appreciate that you're actually putting forth thoughtful replies on both sides of the argument. ;)

Edited by 20000_Posts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[

You call it a tyrant because you ignore the love and the reasoning behind the way he judges. I won't disagree that God is an absolute ruler, but what you call a tyrant I call a fair and just ruler. That's why the hypothesis is moot.

 

Is God a just judge?

 

1Peter 1:20 0 He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake.

 

The above quote shows this as Gods first actual judgement and shows the setting and accepting of a bribe or human sacrifice to corrupt his justice. That justice usually stated that only the punishment of the guilty was acceptable to justice and that it would be unjust to punish the innocent. That corruption of his usual justice is what the bribe or sacrifice of Jesus bought. Injustice.

 

This corrupted judge is what you call a just judge is it?

 

Regards

DL

 

 

 

Stop believing that a genocidal son murderer who can torture and kill babies can somehow be a good God.

 

Stop pulling that dirty God out of your ass and saying he smells good.

 

Lets talk about your satanic God's morals. That is where we will se what kind of God he truly is.

 

You like to keep waving your get into heaven free card as if you earned it in a moral way.

 

Care to engage on that?

 

Shall I take the first shot or do you want to try to justify you, the guilty, trying to profit from the punishment of the innocent?

 

Why did you ignore my accusation?

As far as everything you said in the quoted section above:

902debcaf2f23368b452b1ec8ec92b2b.jpg

 

I believe in the New Testament God. I choose to follow the practices that Jesus preached, such as loving thy neighbor. Unless you plan to pull quotes from that section of the Bible and attempt to use them out of context against me, we have nothing to discuss. You take an Old Testament approach which I will admit showcases a much darker God, I follow the teachings of Jesus. We are two separate topics.

 

Interesting that you completely ignored the fact that you were caught pulling quotes out of context to fuel your arguments. You do understand that doing such a thing crumbles the legitimacy of what you're saying, for without the Biblical support you are left with what you have always been: a mad-man spewing a warped interpretation of religion in an attempt to stir chaos.

 

Any Christian that scraps the O.T. as you have done is just half a Christian. And is also a hypocrite.

 

Talk about being out of context. That is like forgetting that Hitler built the ovens and adoring his other works.

 

Regards

DL

 

 

[

 

In my opinion, Christians see going to heaven as a positive thing. They like the rules imposed, because it's rules they would have followed anyway. I don't think they are expecting a low standard by saying there is eternal happiness after death, I think that standard is mind-numbingly insanly high compared to an atheist view that you just rot in the ground.

 

If Christians liked God's rules, one would think that they would follow them.

 

Check the Christian U.S. jail stats against most atheist countries and note that they are almost the worst in the world. Add that better than 60% of Christians divorce and tell us again how Christian like to follow the bible God's rules.

 

Regards

DL

 

[

 

I reemphasize: a celestial dictatorship.

 

 

Edit: I also do appreciate that you're actually putting forth thoughtful replies on both sides of the argument. ;)

 

You see 20/20.

 

Regards

DL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any Christian that scraps the O.T. as you have done is just half a Christian. And is also a hypocrite.

 

Talk about being out of context. That is like forgetting that Hitler built the ovens and adoring his other works.

 

Unbelievably narrow minded that viewpoint is. Simply because I reside as a Catholic does not mean I must take what is written in Genesis as absolute truth. The OT is a collection of stories, if I were to come here and preach how they are complete accuracy I would fall within the small percentage of hardcore Bible lovers that believe the Earth is 6000 years old and the center of the universe. I'd rather be what you believe to be a "hypocrite" than an idiot (quote for a smart-ass comeback if you wish).

 

As for the Hitler reference, I simply disagree. What Hitler did was real, what God did in the OT I don't believe to be true. What you're saying would hold truth if it was known that God did such things rather than just written that he did, and then I ignored that section. You must understand that one can follow the teachings of Christ without believing in the Bible in its entirety. To think being a Christian means you must accept the Bible as complete truth is ludicrous, for you make religious people out to be nuts in that case, for to believe everything in the Bible as absolute truth is to be illogical and quite frankly, unintelligent.

 

 

Once more, you refuse to comment about your out of context issue. You lied to us in this debate Gnostic, you understand that yes?

Edited by The Skiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole line of debate is moot though, because either God is a tyrant or He is not, and either you believe He is one, or you don't. The first can't be proven either way and for the second we'd need to start throwing scripture around and I don't think anybody benefits from that :P

If god were to exist, he would be a tyrant.

 

This hypothesis is not moot, as it can be judged by the descriptions of god which are conveniently found in scripture.

The fact that you can be convicted of thought crime, must love and fear the ruler, and that you would not know right from wrong if it weren't for dear leader are all strikingly similar to what we would describe as a tyrant.

 

Satan apparently made a good call questioning the dictatorship.

You call it a tyrant because you ignore the love and the reasoning behind the way he judges. I won't disagree that God is an absolute ruler, but what you call a tyrant I call a fair and just ruler. That's why the hypothesis is moot.

Sorry, this quote was getting ridiculous, I shortened the part that wasn't relevant.

 

I agree with reep. I think it's really how you look at it.

 

Yeah, God is the main power, no disagreeing with him, he makes all the rules.

 

But classifying him under the definition of tyrant puts him in a category that is riddled with negativity. The definition of tyranny itself has extreme negative connotations. Those going to heaven are those who believe in the greatness and glory of their Lord, so while they have rules imposed on them, these are arguably rules that they desire.

You're telling me you can't see people in North Korea saying the exact same thing about their Great and Loving Leader?

 

And when the only other option is burning forever they aren't rules they desire, literally anything will be better. Seems to be setting some low standards.

The DPRK is a small, sheltered nation, and I don't think comparing their population to the billions who believe in Christ is fair.

 

The thing I've liked about this debate is the different ideas being thrown around. I was raised Christian, but at the moment I'd consider myself more agnostic, perhaps even atheist (suffice to say, I'm confused about my religious identity). As such, I've been trying to argue through my limited knowledge of the Christian faith

 

Comparing what happens in the mind of a Christian compared to an atheist after death, I think your comment is completely backwards. Setting a low standard? No way! They are setting an (impossibly) high standard that there even IS a life after death! And not only is this unfathomable life eternal, but it aligns perfectly with what they liked back on earth!

 

In my opinion, Christians see going to heaven as a positive thing. They like the rules imposed, because it's rules they would have followed anyway. I don't think they are expecting a low standard by saying there is eternal happiness after death, I think that standard is mind-numbingly insanly high compared to an atheist view that you just rot in the ground.

Scale doesn't affect totalitarianism. You are correct that on the scale of billions it is a bit more Orwellian, though. ;)

 

I think you misunderstood the point I was trying to make. If we make the assumption that there is a God and a Heaven and a Hell, then there are two options: follow the rules (which are said to be right) or burn forever. You have a group of people that will follow the rules faithfully and nothing will stop them. You have another group that wants nothing to do with the rules and will be tortured forever. But there is a third group that reluctantly follows the rules if only because not doing so will be a far worse fate.

 

So by standard, I am saying that it only has to be better than the absolute worst outcome to be viable for 2 out of 3 of the groups. There will be eternal happiness for the first group, but the final group may not find it as perfect as they would wish. And there's nothing they can do about it because saying anything against the Ruler will have you cast into fire and brimstone.

 

Is this not the exact same of every other totalitarian regime? Does Iran not have faithful supporters, people that want nothing but the government to fall, yet also those that follow along just so they don't face punishment?

 

I reemphasize: a celestial dictatorship.

 

 

Edit: I also do appreciate that you're actually putting forth thoughtful replies on both sides of the argument. ;)

Fair point, I wasn't reading it that way initially so thanks for clearing it up!

 

As it happens, I agree with what you're saying now - about that third group. Makes sense, and that is fair they would be unhappy with the rules. I also prefer that phrase you used "celestial dictatorship". I can definitely agree that heaven would be a dictatorship, I just don't think its ruler is a tyrant. (That's probably a bit pedantic, I know).

 

 

 

[

 

In my opinion, Christians see going to heaven as a positive thing. They like the rules imposed, because it's rules they would have followed anyway. I don't think they are expecting a low standard by saying there is eternal happiness after death, I think that standard is mind-numbingly insanly high compared to an atheist view that you just rot in the ground.

 

If Christians liked God's rules, one would think that they would follow them.

 

Check the Christian U.S. jail stats against most atheist countries and note that they are almost the worst in the world. Add that better than 60% of Christians divorce and tell us again how Christian like to follow the bible God's rules.

 

Regards

DL

I would argue that's not very fair though. If you look at the population of America in general, you have way more Christians than other faiths, so it's only logical that the most people in jail are going to be Christian. That's like going to Africa and going, "Whoa! Most people in jail here are black! I guess black people are bad!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is God a just judge? 1Peter 1:20 0 He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake. The above quote shows this as Gods first actual judgement and shows the setting and accepting of a bribe or human sacrifice to corrupt his justice. That justice usually stated that only the punishment of the guilty was acceptable to justice and that it would be unjust to punish the innocent. That corruption of his usual justice is what the bribe or sacrifice of Jesus bought. Injustice. This corrupted judge is what you call a just judge is it? Regards DL

But there is a clear precedent for the transference of sin, as with what the Israelites (and even Abraham and Isaac already) with animal sacrifice, and in fact Jesus is called the Lamb of God in connection to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines and Privacy Policy.