Thats when Paul jacked things up....

I don’t believe that any narcotics influenced Saul. But, I can see why those wishing to discredit the event would infer this.

I was just kidding around. But i meant more along the lines of thats when Paul jacked things up and became a usurper.

Lol, I was hoping that was the case.

However, I don’t believe that Saul seized a position of power without authority either. Rather he was given authority to relinquish his power.

even if there were two choices(which isn't true since there is an infinite amount of possibilities of afterlife and gods) i find it pretty ridiculous that god would send someone to heaven not because someone truly believed in him but rather he/she was afraid to make a bad choice and picked him.. If he was able to read those people's mind he would figure out that they didn't really believe in his existence but rather they are trying to cheat their way into heaven and would probably want to send them into hell as well .. lol

I don't know if this has already been addressed in this thread (slow pony if so) but the real question (and the one I've asked many Christians I know in real life) is this:

Why would you believe in a God that would send a good person to hell just because they don't believe in him?

If I was God and was judging people, I wouldn't care one iota if they believed in me while they were here, only if they passed the test and were a good person that treated others with respect and lived a good life. I find it unforgivable to send a person that lived a good life but just happened to not believe in God to hell.

We are all born into sin. Once one understands this concept one is on the path to enlightenment. Most think they are sinless because they have led a "good life" they hate to think of themselves as sinners. Take the analogy of putting a drop of water into a glass of beer. The drop of water becomes beer. It mixes with the beer; it doesn’t have any choice. We have been born into sin; we also did not have any choice. It is not possible to be sinless in a sinful world.

If someone says to me that they haven’t done anything wrong, I ask them if they have ever stolen anything. They normally deny this. So I ask them to look in their home. What pens do they have in the house? Any pens from work that they have conveniently forgotten to return? Any paper clips? This is stealing. They have broken one of The Ten Commandments right there.

Let’s look at lusting after another man or woman when you are married? How many times do married men or women look at another man or woman with even a hint of desire? That is committing adultery, another one of The Ten Commandments. People like to believe that you can look but not touch and this wouldn’t be sinning, but it is. People think that this is impossible. That’s just it, it’s impossible. It is impossible to not sin, to not be a sinner.

There is no shame in admitting that one is a sinner. Especially as it leads to a better life, than that which continuing to live in un-forgiven sin leads to. Admitting you are a sinner leads to eternal life knowing only good, instead of eternal life knowing only evil.

so basically GOD f*cked up everything on purpose so that he could rescue us and then pretend like he is our savior? he must have been one bored being...

...

Definition of ADULTERY
: voluntary sexual intercourse between a married man and someone other than his wife or between a married woman and someone other than her husband; also : an act of adultery

False. You lied. That is a sin iirc (false testimony lol).


You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.

Definition of COVET
transitive verb
1
: to wish for earnestly <covet an award>
2
: to desire (what belongs to another) inordinately or culpably
intransitive verb
: to feel inordinate desire for what belongs to another

First, this post in no way addresses my question. Whether everyone "sins" or doesn't sin is irrelevant. You can see how someone can live a good life and be a good person and not believe in God, right? If you can't, you haven't had enough life experiences or your on a level of close mindednes that I can't fathom.

Now, how do you justify God sending this person to hell for all eternity just because they don't believe in him?

If this was an attempt at refuting my point, I don't understand it.

Honestly, what did you expect? Put yourself in his shoes. You are a curious observer, you've obviously heard about Christianity but don't know much about its specific tenants, so you ask some self professed Christians about certain things.

What comes back is a thread of people attempting to justify genocide, and saying they would commit unspeakable things in the name of a being based on nothing more than his say so....

Think that might put you off a little bit?

The problem here is that many of you ITT wear this "all or nothing" flag like its a badge of honor... it isn't. There are many things in the bible that are downright horrific.

Many Christians have realized this, and now tow the line of "well Jesus changed all that in the NT"

A cowardly cop-out, yes, but its better than attempting to justify acts of murder just to uphold the belief system that most comfortably suits you.

Some have even go so far as to say that nothing could ever happen to make them doubt there faith in Christ... why anyone would ever admit such close mindedness with pride is really beyond me.

It wasn’t God that messed up. It was first Satan and then Adam. But, I do believe that God is our only Saviour. I cannot comment on whether it was from boredom that God created. I asked some creative friends why they created and some said that they enjoyed creating. Some said because they discovered that they could and some said because they just had to. Not one said because they were bored.

Good post. I was basing my point on this:

Matthew 5:28 but I say unto you, that every one that looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

This is a good one as well:

Proverbs 23:7 For as he thinketh within himself, so is he

But, I will use covet in future as it is far safer and something we can all relate to more readily.

Thanks

The reason we cannot see God is because we are so impure we would be destroyed instantly if we were anywhere in proximity. Only the Holy can be in the presence of the most Holy. The secular, manmade definition of "good" falls short.

It is now not possible for us to become righteous enough by our own endeavours. First we must come to understand that we are in sin. Then we must ask (with genuine repentance) for God’s forgiveness, the forgiveness that was gained for us by Jesus. Then we should know that we have been forgiven and forgive others. This is the message contained in the Bible.

The Bible does not contain the message that there is only a heaven and that everyone goes there. I struggled with this for years but the Bible is the word of God. Nowhere in it can I see it mentioned that everyone will go to heaven regardless.

I am unable to make you believe that God is innocent of sending anyone to hell. Just as I am also unable to make you believe that no one is innocent. I acknowledge that "belief" is personal to you and personal to me.

I continue to try to understand how I can accept the God of the Old Testament as well as the God of the New Testament. Especially as I am meant to believe (and do believe) that they are the same person. I keep an open mind in so far as by reading different commentaries; light may continue to be shed as to the real situation.

I have begun to understand that it can only be God that is justified (by His Mercy) to kill. And He has only ever done so after more patience than any of us could ever have. If you read commentaries on the Old Testament they describe a Holy God that wants his Creation and created to become completely righteous. However, the opposite appears to happen time and time again. It has been suggested for instance that at the time of the Flood there were only 10 righteous people (those saved by the Ark).

I have often wondered why didn’t the Creator just destroy His Creation and be done with it if it upset Him so much. But, He is to go one better than that, according to Revelation after a last complete destruction, He is to engage in a new Creation that we can, if we choose, all be a part of.

But why? Why does he have that right? Because he created us? Because he sometimes shows mercy? How does that give him the right to murder?

To an outsider this sounds very much like "Well god murdered, and murder is wrong, but god cannot be wrong, so in this case, murder must be right."

In the end it boils down to you making excuses for God's behavior, and why should you have to make excuses for an all knowing, all powerful, all loving being?

You are right I shouldn’t have to make excuses for God’s behaviour. I won’t make excuses for God’s behaviour.

You are also right that it can be objected to as being hypocritical for God to kill but then demand that we shouldn’t and this is hard for some to take. And many do use your example to justify their own killing. But, they are wrong to do so and are breaking one of the Ten Commandments.

I tried to explain that I believe that God only killed as an extreme last resort (as He will again one last time as described in Revelation). Those that God killed must have been so evil that they would have killed all around them and also themselves and no one would have been left. So, God choose the most righteous that He could find, protected them but killed the rest to prevent extinction. I am not trying to make an excuse for this action by God. I am trying to come up with the correct explanation.

[/B][/B]
I empathize with your dilemma, I was not always a heathen...

you keep coming back to "those people must have been evil, no seriously, like sooooooo evil..." and I understand why. To even consider that they were not evil suggests horrible things about god.

When you say you are trying to come up with a correct explanation what i'm hearing is "I'm trying to find a scenario wherein God doesn't look like such a scumbag" But I don't think that's a possibility.

Someone who tells you to commit genocide, and then keep the female virgins for yourself, is not good, or just. It is natural you would feel conflicted by this, your own moral standard is probably a lot more worthy of praise.

Bump for this.

Or, another explanation could be that those that God killed were worshippers of Satan and they would have managed to convert all around them to Satanism (or kill those that wouldn’t convert) and no one would have been left to worship God. So, God stepped in to protect those that were precious to him but killed the rest to prevent Satan from being worshipped by all of God’s Creation.

I do wonder why Satan doesn’t get as much criticism as God. Do more worship Satan than God now? But then I guess more can relate to Satan "because he is only doing what he wants to do" and that’s what they want to do also. Or, is it because Satan is sin and lots are in tune, whether consciously or subconsciously, with this and want to hold onto their sin for some reason?

I'm not really sure. There's a lot of trial and error in practicing faith and inductive reasoning that's hard to prove.

Jones says the Abraham-Isaac event was a love test by God:
http://www.gods-kingdom-ministries.o...er.cfm?CID=257

I wonder if he did all that way he didn't just start with the New Earth. But going by his track record im not sure it will be all its cracked up to be either.

n/m