EVOLUTION - Page 13

quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------

quote:

---

Unfortunately our discussion has deteriorated to the point you have adopted ad hominems and mockery as your argument.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------



Um no, I would be specific but you offered no example.

---

Let me clarify for you, what I was saying is that mockery was not my arguement. That is just thrown in because you kind of suck.

Do you understand the difference better now?

quote:

---

That must be part of your efforts to "discover absolution for the betterment of all mankind", eh?

---

Never said I was perfect there prophet.

quote:

---

I gather you present pretentious arguments just for the sake of arguing.

---

Yes, I gather you do. Like getting into a debate about evolution only to state that god told it was bullshit.

That's both pretentious and leads nowhere for anyone else, only arguements can insue.

quote:

---

After all I've said about how God interacts with his people and affirms truth in the heart, scriptures as an example, you still deny the fact I've answered you??? Talk about stiff necked!

---

You have appeared to answer as much as you are willing or capable, but you allow no debate to your point making debating you pointless.

I was asking for clarification however. Like what made you so certain your experience was so directed towards edorsing scripture etc. But you aren't very good at elaborating either.

quote:

---

Because despite your narrow mindedness there are people who know more of God and walk with God; but you not have the signs of being one of them.

---

Ditto to you sir.

quote:

---

If the eternal stakes weren't so high I'd be greatly amused at the pompous stance you agnostic types take.

---

And what stakes are those?

quote:

---

You do not know and haven't experienced a true relationship with God on Gods terms

---

Tsk tsk. Not true at all, an arrogant assumption indeed. This is why people who think for themselves aren't fond of you or your kind.

It tends to sound at this point that you currently choose to exist to push manipulated dogma on people. Not even educate them on why or whats good about it, just push it. I hope I am mistaken.

quote:

---

And so if they disagree with your surreal opinions; they're dishonest? Get real!

---

But you see, this isn't what you are doing, you are saying theories are lies and anything but what you believe god to have confirmed to you is false and a lie.

You aren't disagreeing and adding thought or reason and evidence to support an opinion anymore.

When you did, you were quickly countered, usually with your own line of logic, you folded like a cheap suit, and hid behind the only card your playing with, god told you so.

Yes, I'm treating you like you deserve. You like so many seem to fail to register your passive aggressive arrogant pretentious ways to the point that you are actually surprised when someone openly mocks your attitude.

Denial is among the biggest signs of a closed mind sir.

And honestly, I don't care for people who go around trying to close other minds, as it is the greatest form of disrespect and aggressiveness and tyranny, passive or not.

But you don't seem to have a clue as to what I'm talking about as you are only here to preach, or so it would seem.

My internet presence is irrelevant to the points of debate, but you don't actually do that anymore so feel free to be pointless I guess.

However. I will attempt to get back to the subject of debate and the points lost, perhaps one at a time. Though I don't expect much anyway since you cannot hold context either.

When I asked and spoke of scriptures manipulation and rightful skepticism and you out of context got defensive trying to defend your precious belief instead mentioning god's message being preserved.

I was trying to see if you were still going to defend the scripture, even though it is tainted, regardless of god's message.

Which you seem to do, but who knows, because you can't keep in context.

The reason for that sought knowledge is because if you are not willing to address man's manipulation to those you push scripture on then you truly do suck.

I get the impression though that you may actually be bright enough, as you somewhat did, to acknowledge this fallibility, but for whatever reason you feel a need to defend scripture in its entirety, contradictorally, at the same time. This is a nuance I was hoping to have clarified.

God's true message as I mentioned, to my understanding, is ever present and available without any need of scripture and even warning of scripture from my own experience.

There is nuance here as well still. But I doubt it will be probed rather than jumped over, oh well.

I do hope you tell me of the eternal stakes to which you refer, at the very least. I assume I likely know, and if it is what I'm thinking I will be likely chastising you on your closing minds off from god even more.

quote:

---

Ps> You want a definitive description of what God is : Spirit and Truth. Deal with it.

---

I even braced myself just in case. Turns out I dealt with it fairly ok.

But I'll do you one better, I'll give the more likely definition of god in one word.

All

Deal with it

God you crack me up.

In an attempt to be more palletable and productive Id like to reorganize myself and the debate at this point.

Manbible, if you will...

So your arguement is that evolution is not a valid theory because it contradicts scripture, if I'm remembering correctly, yes?

Can and will you share what in scripture is contradicted by evolutionary theory and how so? Make the arguement for scripture, so to speak.

Ironwood,

Your "reorganization" per se, is appreciated.

Let me clarify something for you real quick. When I posted my original post on this thread it was just a passing thought on the subject. I had no thesis or peer reviewed paper in mind when I expressed my observation and definitely wasn't prepared to inter into an in depth , lengthy debate.

Now to address your concerns. I do not make the point "evolution" is invalid as a scientific theory. Quite the opposite really, it's the only working theory we have in an attempt to explain life on this planet, (and this planet for that matter outside of the God explanation) that we have so no way it can be considered invalid.

The issue with evolution I have is the way it has been presented from grade school to scholarly level academia. While there are some aspects of the theory that are factual there are many aspects that are assumed factual as well. Due to imaginative presumptions partially based on some of the uncontested biological facts. Let me put it into the contexts of my first post in response to 'Theory' on this thread. He used the rapid adaptability of the flu virus as an example of evolution in action. He also had said he believed in God and if I recall correctly that evolution was the way "God" had jump started life or something to that affect.. It was in that context that I made a statement suggesting that evolution contradicts scripture. I made that remark because of verses found in genesis. 1: 24&25...

"24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. 25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good."

The contradiction I alluded to was the common explanation of the theory where a cell developed from a lifeless preexistence and then upon the act of reproduction other life forms began to branch out; slowly mutating into other forms over time.

And the obvious indication in the verses above where it appears God created archetypes. Hence my first post on this thread expressing how evolution moves toward the explanations found in the scripture at times. I hadn't yet realized that "Theory" held pantheist beliefs but once it was known I imediatly saw the futility of perusing a scripture based avenue.

Let me clarify my general opinion of evolution. Can animals change in order to adapt to a change in their environment? Yes, some better than others but over all, yes. Are there random mutations? Of coarse. Is adapting a form of mutation? I'm not convinced it is. Can continually adapting to environmental changes change the base species into a completely and entirely different species as in reptiles to birds? Absolutely not.
My humble opinion.

As for my case "for scripture", There are so many nuances in scripture alone that it's too hard to put into words. As I've said previously I have researched many different aspects of the scriptures taking all that I could think of into consideration including the scriptures themselves.

I'm aware of the negative criticisms concerning scripture including the "manipulation" you bring up as well as others. I know as well that many think "how's the Christian Bible any different then the sacred writing of other religions." I can only tell you that I took the time to investigate these types of concerns and was satisfied with what I found regarding them. That is to say I believe they do not adequately discredit scripture. It really is too involved to get into details on a forum such as this for there are literally hundreds of books written on the subject. One of the first ones I read if you're interested was "A case for Christ" by Lee Strobel. In that book he listed references and that basically got the ball rolling for me.

But let me offer this up for what it's worth. It is a rather simplistic and basic example that by no means can make a case on it's own but it should give you an idea of the method I used to test the validity of the Bible. One truth that's known to just about everybody is the essential mineral make up of our bodies.

Calcium, Iodine, Iron, Magnesium, Phosporus, Selenium, Zinc.

These minerals are found in the earth. The Bible says we came from the dust of the earth which is pretty significant considering that in the time of Moses, (who is believed to have written Genesis), not much was widely known about minerals and their essential role in making our lives possible.

Like I said, that alone doesn't mean much but when you put that with a plethora of other facts I researched then you could understand why I'm satisfied with the truthfulness of scripture.

let us not ommit or exclude, marginalize and or supress anything in our dialectic

"...and in the image of god made He them both, male and female and called THEIR name adam"

emphasis added

okaaaaayy....

Adam later names her "Eve" and while God is assigning the Sin to Adam we end up in a world where Eve is blamed but technically according to the verbage she is not guilty...

I never under stood how the KEEPER of the Garden, the protector and all, could be given the laws of the land from the god, put to sleep, and there after......

a woman is created, YET NO WHERE IN THE TEXT
does Adam pass on the law to the woman from among him....

later in the garden

God pulls them both on the carpet, before the man, as it were

and by verbage GOD describes the error as

"BECAUSE OF WHAT YOU HAVE DONE ADAM"

and gives out the so.called original bias

which Man, in his infancy and blatancy

blames on woman for known history

Even when God asked him, "What is this thing you have done?"

Adam's response is

"IT WAS THE WOMAN THAT YOU GAVE ME"

which is to exactly
PASS THE BUCK AND BLAME THE RIGHTEOUS

Man in a nutshell.. lol

this lack of responsiblity among men of the Judeo Christian Faiths, guides the principles' application in our society

Poor guy...

In My World, of Faith, Woman is God...

X

the X, Chromosome

is 3 times as large as the y

in a combination towards procreation there are

3 times as many X chromosomes

it only takes ONE of them to be 75 percent larger than the y or male chromosome...

She is considered,( in my faith), the Second Self or the First Reflection of GOD...

That's why she mirrors the universe...

And all that comes by way of the womb does as well

75 percent water on Planet Earth
25 percent Earth on the Planet

75 Percent to 80 percent Water based life, as a human
25 Percent Solid, Stone or Bone

9 planets to completion in the womb
9 months to the birth of baby.... you know what i mean

9 Major Systems, physically, lungs digestive tracts, liver... etc
with one major sytem to rule them.. The Brain, which holds them in the circumference of its gravity or leaning or knowledge

like the planets held in orbit by the Sun the One ring that rules them all



biologically the woman provides 3 times as much
and the majority of the genetic material for human life and its potentials of "blah blah blah"

eye color to personality

She is the basis

Male directs, or writes upon the X chromosome, guiding it into eventual form

She is the Mother of Civilization, the first teacher of the children

of Jesus

Is his Mother....

My culture is Matriarchal

perhaps this should be your driving force

Encourage the Men of your cultural expression, to study learn and apply the knowledge of the human family from the perspective of the woman.

She is the second self of god, as I've been taught

To ignore her after misinterpretation, from Genesis

well, I like to set my children up for success... not failure

Knowledge gives birth, even after being outdated.... get after these guys in the right way and you'll be secured as my own daughter....

who's 6

and can tell the diff between a centered human male
and a status quo "man" from parts unknown,,,,

promise...

plus I wouldn't tell this to most guys, normally..... they don't unfuck themselves
as a rule

women love the TRUTH

She knows that the TRUTH is always in her favor.... maybe by instinct, nature.... who knows how....

it's been my experience... though

In my understanding, we've been consistent High Civilization since 66 trillion years past

so.....

we've been Matriarchal, far longer than, Patriarchal

harder to accept than reject... however, given such a reality

it would appear that we don't understand a solitary "lick" of how to bring about 5 shades of human beings with everyone having the same degree of and texture of

eyebrows

yeah, eyebrows.... alll the same.. and so much else... the similarities

most evolution questions deliniate to questions about SELF

so self-intrested, lol

I'd say that there is a gradual change afforded by admixture and birth order design.....

both of which could have been affected by the Social Order of a High Civilization

just the likely hood of the effect, or causes are lost to us

or maybe they are lost on us, because we fail to recognize the dominant side of the species...

woman

like all other dominant genetic types, it only makes perfect sense that they are ruled by the minority

less men than women

like less Irish than world population

less Jews than the world

Less Jamaicans than the world and Germans tooo

always these FEW

yet they dominate the social order

everyone from America to furthest Russia knows what a Jamaican is...

same for the rest of the minorities...

seems our EVOLUTION
is constrained to our equal and opposite social orders....

depends on where you land on the NATURE versus NURTURE
arguments.. and the value judgements you place on the demographic influences of both sexes

Adam Seth God,

WOW!! I'm almost speechless. Let me just say that if you spun this tale based on Genesis as you've alluded, you've gotten off on the wrong track.

Quote: "a woman is created, YET NO WHERE IN THE TEXT
does Adam pass on the law to the woman from among him....

later in the garden "

That is where you went wrong. You're right, no where does it say " And Adam told Eve the law" but scripture does reveal Eve knew the law...

"2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: 3 but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die."

Eve "passed the buck" and blamed the serpent (Satan) for tricking her. She wasn't tricked, she knew the law, she simply desired what wasn't hers to have. A part of the human condition we all experience. Greed and envy.

Manbible,

So you are just arguing for an interpretation. I can see how someone could presume archetypes are meant, but further analysis sees that as more likely a shaping of interpretation to bolster a desired outcome or opinion.

I see it more as a generalized and limited view merely listing what the author could conceive and many other potential interpretations.

I still could see how many points including evolution could be included in scripture regardless of articulation or lack thereof.

In your defense of scripture, how do you personally account for all the "jesus" stories from so many far more ancient and even similarly dated holy texts and non? The literal deluge of virgin birthed sons of god who died and rose so often conveniently on an astrological and "pagan" date of significance? With even moses and paul/peter? sharing nearly the same origin story?

The list is rather large and like I said often predates all scripture.

And I certainly have never been left feeling any sets of scriptures or denominations to be more accurate or holy, but that always seemed common sensicle to me. Especially regarding all the main religions and their branches who all share some degree of the same origin but none say the same thing ultimately. Even interpretation from two different "authorities" will differ.

So no, I do not see why you hold such confidence after your research unless you were indeed researching with a biased agenda, intentional or not.

I do see a potential case of seeing what one wants to see in "evidence".

Perhaps that will change with how you explain the noted issues.

Ironwood,

Whos analysis? What is your "desired outcome?"

How do I personally account for all the "Jesus" stories??? How do you? I can give you a specific point by point account on oh, say Horus, but would you accept it? I think not. I'd be wasting my time and it would accomplish nothing. Unless you want to be open to other possibilities you're always going to see the other "Jesus" stories as evidence that no scripture can be trusted. It is as far as I can tell one way you reconcile your vision of God. Besides, we're not accountable for lies or falsehoods spread by another, we're held accountable by truth.

Humor me and think about this if you would.... since scripture is the subject in question then scripture itself can be used as evidence. In John chapter one we read that Jesus was there at the beginning, a pre-incarnate Christ if you will. There at the beginning of time, Time now evolves around his appearance on earth. How many other "stories" make that claim? See, when I inquired into those other stories I found out they really aren't that close to the real Jesus and as you said they varied greatly depending on what "authority" you were listening to.

And as for bias, we all have them, including you. An honest person takes them into consideration. My agenda? To discuss matters of truth and let the chips fall where they may.

My desired outcome is obvious universal truth. Something neither you nor I and not even your scriptures can yet provide.

But that's ok for me, because I'm still seeking truth. I have had awakenings, but they are incomplete.

I am completely open to your justifications, but yes they must overcome obstacles of reasonable skepticism and other interpretations of "truth" then just yours.

Not so much like the "real jesus"? That wasn't the qualifying point. Base elements of the story being continually repeated to a degree of being more suprised if a scripture didn't have them was the point, indeed limiting credibility on those points.

But yes, I understand the concepts of misinformation and disinformation quite well, but then I mentioned that when referencing man's manipulation.

I do not know how many stories hold the point of a jesus character before time, and though I see the significance you try to give it there is also much logical arguement against where you are going with it. Equally seemingly wasteful of time to bother to articulate as you seem to feel.

But yes, you are correct, just because you provide your interpretation does not mean I am going to agree with it, especially if I see gaping holes in it.

Nor should you expect such a weak case to move me, if you have any respect for intellect.

Im surprised by how your revelation is so focused on scripture. I truly wish you could elaborate. But I understand how difficult it is too. Among the earliest truth I felt I divined about scripture was not to get caught up in the words or the validity arguement, but instead its message.

Its truths resonate as such, its manipulations fall short.

And though you admit to man's manipulation, you still seem to defend scripture as a whole. That's what confuses me about your position.

Ironwood,

What exactly are the truths that resonate and what are the "manipulations?" that you discount? Up to now your case is mild at best against scripture, why wouldn't I defend scripture? It's been under assault since Satan tried to discredit it in the beginning. Yet remains the best selling literature of all time. And that is because its truths resonate.

But even more compelling then that is the personal affirmation God gives. You are right, I can't articulate anymore then I already have. It's beyond words and human comprehension what transpired in my life that day.Yet I know what God desires of us. Unfortunately we must trust his intellect enough to submit to it before we can begin to understand. As long as you depend on your intellect you will not be open. That is a truth right out of scripture. It tells us his wisdom is foolishness to us and that he will make our wisdom foolishness. What do you suppose that means? Fact is if we could understand with just our own faculties and needed no divine interpretation it would make spreading the Gospel easier.

But God wanted us to remember why we don't understand, we didn't listen to him from the very beginning. We rejected his word because Satan rivaled it with his own and it's no different now with your concerns. What is universal truth? Can you define that which you seek?

Manbible, I honestly couldn't delineate all the scriptural vs. perceptual manipulation at this point anymore. And just like yourself, I wont bother trying as it is likely irrelevant.

But suffice to say, the "word of god " has been altered. Entire books stripped out even.

Why would you defend scripture? Based on your given point, it didn't exist in the beggining for satan to challenge it, that I've ever been made aware of, what an odd thing to say.

Best selling? Yes, when laws are passed and threats are levied, that can happen. I refer of course to hotels, court rooms, crusades, book burnings, families and communities threatening excommunication etc.

But none of that is the scriptures fault right? Just satan, a tool of scripture.

So your experience is beyond your own comprehension yet you have come to a decisive conclusion on what it means and represents, and basically that is that scripture is ultimate truth? Seems a bit contradictory to me in basic logic.

So, what does god desire for us sir?

My dependence on intellect was in reference to you, not gods message, though to a degree there as well I might add. As when regarding anyone's interpretation of anything. Intuition and all manner of other senses are employed as well. Otherwise I would just buy any crap anyone is peddling, yes? I thought that was common sense and even part of your own arguement.

So I'm not open because I don't believe everything I hear or read is what you just said, nice.

All divine interpretation is welcome, exclusive and selective claims of it remain dubious.

Look, if we are supposed to be so worried about satan's manipulations and mans, how can you possibly advocate the man made scriptures in any way for anyone else to take your word for it? You can't. But that doesn't seem ok to you. Your worried about the still unaddressed ramifications you alluded to so long ago.

I would still appreciate you sharing by the way.

But again on that last point, its not a dig against you or your experience. The point is if god wants something made clear that involves some eternal consequence he needs to fucking speak up and clearly and not blame us for those who didn't listen to him when he bothered in the first place.

To place such a burden on the dumbed down sheeple swimming in lies is rediculous without a better solution than tainted scripture from eons ago made with and further manipulated by bias and agendas.

Logic be dammed, any god who claims love will show such compassion and reason.

And I'm betting he does, and it has nothing to do with scripture. Not to discount the truths in scripture, but I don't get the impression that you've gotten or cared much about thoughts beyond scripture.

This is why I continually refer to message vs. books. The truth is not bound in or by any singular writing, yet can be divined from all.

This is why I'm so stuck on you. You felt a divine experience and all you seem to have to show for it is advocacy of scripture.

Please tell me there is more.

Your satan vs the god who made satan doesn't make as much sense as you seem to think, please elaborate without expecting others to share your faith or simply revel alone in it and be well I guess.

What truth am I advocating? The only truths that were presented to me as falsehoods or dogmatically limited that I'm advocating is of a conscious spirit and abilities beyond what are generally considered possible or acceptable.

Fear and limitation is what I tend to disagree with. And it is this generalized manipulation man has implemented on the masses and scripture itself to which I most generally refer.

one can not say that something is true when you learn it in school. almost everything they teach is school is a load of shit. but i also want to say please go and read the i do not want to believe in god thread in purely anonymous.

Ironwood,

Look at what you are saying. God hasn't left us to wallow in ignorance. You know full well what God desires of you, that is why you can't let this go. You know you must submit to him in order to gain the universal truth that you seek. You know I nor anyone else can deliver that for as you said, we all have our biases.

quote: "But again on that last point, its not a dig against you or your experience. The point is if god wants something made clear that involves some eternal consequence he needs to fucking speak up and clearly and not blame us for those who didn't listen to him when he bothered in the first place."

He's made it abundantly clear and your intuition is telling you I'm right. The problem is your intellect can't see how that can be. That is why you're so perplexed and "stuck on me " as you say.

You say logic be dammed? You say scripture wasn't there at the beginning of time? Do you realize that scripture tells us God spoke and we were created? That is how light was created. God revealed is creative ability through his word. "And God said, let there be light; and there was light" ~Genesis 1:3 Sound familiar? That is pertinent since scripture is the subject. The "Word of God" was there in the beginning. That is why I brought up John 1 earlier. And that is why I said his word has been under attack since the beginning of time.

One more note Ironwood, How logical is it to believe in a god who is comprised of the collective consciousness of all that exist but has no ability to act on it? He can only start something called "life" and then sit back and watch helplessly as life advances? How can such a god be considered a god? Without the ability to preserve its principles through the generations of its creations nor can it accomplish its purpose for creating in the first place?

I say it's not a god at all nor logical. Mainly because such a god is regulated to the imaginations of men, rendering it nonexistent. No, God is sovereign and he exist as a sovereign God. God created us to be with him voluntarily of our own will so naturally he had to give us the option to seek him and his ways out, or to reject him. And that is where the eternal consequences come in. We exist so we can't enter the realm on the nonexistent, as scripture says : "What has light to do with darkness?" So the alternative is hell of our own choosing. And you knew that.

Let me clarify something....I didn't mean I didn't comprehend what happened that day. I meant that I can't put it into words where others could completely comprehend for they would need divine intervention as well. When one submits to Gods will then they understand the affirmation God provides of his word and in his word. That's the only way I can articulate it.

Ironwood,

Scripture can't be accountable for adversity in the world, man is. Mankind has failed to understand them and acted on his own agenda. Because we have a proclivity for sin and God wants us to subject ourselves to a sinless existence IE submit freely to his will trusting him for our contentment. And God has made that known from the onset, in his word.

quote:

---

Look at what you are saying. God hasn't left us to wallow in ignorance. You know full well what God desires of you, that is why you can't let this go.

---

Unfortunately you likely misinterpret my words. But in essence you are correct. I have an internal burning passion for truth and saving those who live in fear and ignorance instead of loving blissful empowerment.

quote:

---

You know you must submit to him in order to gain the universal truth that you seek.

---

This I barely know what you are even talking about. Someone would have to be present and presenting what I need to submit to for this to even begin to make sense.

But from my perspective I only need to submit to my responsibility for my own empowerment. So I can be a good steward and do my part.

I didn't create or empower satan, and I take issue with anyone who has quite frankly.

quote:

---

He's made it abundantly clear and your intuition is telling you I'm right. The problem is your intellect can't see how that can be. That is why you're so perplexed and "stuck on me " as you say.

---

Oh dear god no, this is where you are quite mistaken.

I'm stuck on you because I see intelligence and hear of mystical experience but get a product of defensiveness that refuses to simply promote god's message and instead advocate a tainted scripture.

Which is by the way, exactly what my intuition tells me. That there is taint and inner guidance, not outer, no books, no prophets, no one but my own inner guidance is needed or can even be trusted to cut through the crap.

quote:

---

You say scripture wasn't there at the beginning of time? Do you realize that scripture tells us God spoke and we were created?

---

Um, yes, I'm quite aware that someone thousands and indeed millions of years later wrote a book accounting this declared version of events.

But to the best of my knowledge, no scripture existed before humans did... Correct me if I'm wrong... Nor is this the only accounting or scriptured version of the beggining of time or humanity.

This is where you look like a zealot who forgoes common sense, but I'd like to think better of you.

quote:

---

One more note Ironwood, How logical is it to believe in a god who is comprised of the collective consciousness of all that exist but has no ability to act on it? He can only start something called "life" and then sit back and watch helplessly as life advances? How can such a god be considered a god? Without the ability to preserve its principles through the generations of its creations nor can it accomplish its purpose for creating in the first place?

---

I don't advocate such a position as you describe. I do not claim to know full what god is for certain, and I certainly don't claim to know any purpose of god's.

And untill anyone claiming to be or speaking to god can explain the paradox of existance or the existance of god, let alone these petty purposes that make no sense overall, I will question rather than follow.

I don't like to think that there is such a petty god that he plays with animated clay dolls and puts them in impossibly absurd puzzles to appease his desire for obediant monkeys to stroke his ego. But that's just me, though I'm open to that possibility as nothing would surprise me at this point.

But your definition...

quote:

---

God created us to be with him voluntarily of our own will so naturally he had to give us the option to seek him and his ways out, or to reject him. And that is where the eternal consequences come in. We exist so we can't enter the realm on the nonexistent, as scripture says : "What has light to do with darkness?" So the alternative is hell of our own choosing.

---

Lacks the absurd sounding jealous god aspect generally presented in the bible.

Regardless, what is the point of creating man? And to give them the power to condemn themselves? Why would they want to do that?

But your articulated version again portrays my intuitive vision of man's powers. The power to create their own hell, but as less articulated, their own heaven as well. Their own reality, either knowing god and themselves and their power, or languishing in fear and ignorance and all that that manifests.

But you refuse to see it that way even though you are basically saying the same thing. That is what troubles me about you and your interpretation of both scripture and your own experience.

My experience has explicitly shown me that all the restrictive dobma and man made manipulation meant to hold us back from our true glory is what is false. It has not been too explicit on who or what god is except for the source, the collective whole that we can either choose to be a part of or live in agony alone and afraid as we see in the terrified and confused masses being herded like enslaved sheep to kill and supress one another.

quote:

---

Let me clarify something....I didn't mean I didn't comprehend what happened that day. I meant that I can't put it into words where others could completely comprehend for they would need divine intervention as well. When one submits to Gods will then they understand the affirmation God provides of his word and in his word. That's the only way I can articulate it.

---

Fair enough, but a point is that you shouldn't be surprised that people need divine intervention to have any hope of truly knowing god and his word.

But scripture is not the only nor even the best avenue. God's word far supercedes anything that can be articulated in any human language.

This is why seeking god from within is the only answer and was what Jesus was trying to tell us from interpretations that make sense.

quote:

---

Scripture can't be accountable for adversity in the world, man is.

---

Except for god's creation and allowance of such adversity, you would be correct. Why you don't see scripture as a product of man, or at least tainted by it, is beyond me.

That's my only main point with your scripture addiction. Not to say that it holds no divined truths like any truly inspirational work of any sort does, but that man has both failed to articulate and even abused the very words that were offered.

quote:

---

Because we have a proclivity for sin and God wants us to subject ourselves to a sinless existence IE submit freely to his will trusting him for our contentment. And God has made that known from the onset, in his word.

---

This can be worded differently to the same ultimate effect, either way, I ultimately take no issue with it.

Harming ourselves vs. helping, personal gratification vs ultimate shared bliss, quick fix vs earned and deeply felt gratification, taking what is available vs creating more in which to share etc etc

I do not live in fear, where is this fear you speak of?

Yes man can manipulate scripture but why do you insist on thinking the message is lost because of man. You said I'm advocating the same thing "practically" as you??? That would suggest the opposite.

Ironwood, enlighten me if you would, what "message" did God give you and how was it delivered?

Quote: "But scripture is not the only nor even the best avenue. God's word far supercedes anything that can be articulated in any human language.

This is why seeking god from within is the only answer and was what Jesus was trying to tell us from interpretations that make sense."

Please elaborate.