From: gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: some questions about God(tm)
Date: 29 Aug 92 07:31:17 GMT
Organization: Stay Awake Software

<sbuckley.714969055@sfu.ca> sbuckley@fraser.sfu.ca (Stephen Buckley) writes:
>gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
>>I think this is the crux of the problem for many people, Christian and
>>non-Christian.  How the heck did *we* disobey god thousands of years ago
>>when *we* weren't born yet?  Doesn't it sound the least little bit
>>ridiculous to persecute the offspring for the "sins" of the parents?
> 
>  eden's original sin was just the beginning.  we all fall short of
>god's glory, so we sin on our own.

It doesn't sound to me like your god does a very good job of creating.  He
created Satan, who was corrupt, apparently for the sole purpose of
corrupting us.

>>>since we have the freedom to do whatever is within our capacity, some of what
>>>we can do, god considers bad.
>
>>And much of what god has done we consider bad.
>
>  speak for youself.  :)

I guess I have to.  I *personally* feel that drowning babies and
raping and slaughtering innocent women are _bad_.  Apparently, according
to you, most Christians think these things are great.  That's pretty
repulsive in my book.

>>>>>                                 beyond that i choose to not judge god's
>>>>>motives.  
>>>
>>>>That's because you are afraid of him.
>>>
>>>  and you should be more careful when you claim to know the motivations
>>>of other people.  
>
>>That was a conclusion I reached from your postings.  You seem to think
>>that your god is above his own rules.  Why?  Because he has the power to
>>be above the rules.  "Might makes right."  Therefore it seems to follow
>>that while you wouldn't tolerate a *human* child molester or infant killer,
>>you tolerate a *god* who does these things because you can't stop him.
>
>>It appears that you fear god's wrath.
>
>  yeah, i do.  but that is a small part of my relationship with him.  

Why do you argue with me, only to agree with me later.  What's the point?
You imply I'm wrong when I say that you are afraid of your god, then 10
lines later you say I was right in the first place.

>and yeah, god's rules are different than ours.
>  isaiah 55:8-9 [NIV]
>  "'For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,'
>declares the Lord.  'As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are
>my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts."
>
>  seems reasonable to me.

You enjoy and rejoice when women and babies are slaughtered?  This seems
reasonable to you?  Someday your god might come to you and tell you that
your wife and children are of the "wrong tribe".  He'll order you to kill
them all.  You'd find this reasonable.

And you don't see why I'm repulsed by a religion that foments this type of
thinking.

>>>  no, god works by different rules than he makes for us.
>
>>So you choose to rationalize.  That's fine.  I just wanted to know your
>>beliefs.
>
>  see the isaiah quote.

I see a scripture that says you can't judge your god, so you choose not
to because he's god.  Even though he perpetrates the most heinous of
crimes against humans and the world.

>>>>>                                                    many disagree with me
>>>>>and with all other christians who believe that.  they're free to believe
>>>>>it is not god's autobiography.  i believe it is.
>>>
>>>>It can't be.  It doesn't describe god's life and evolution, it supposedly 
>>>>describes *man's* life and evolution.
>>>
>>>  who says god has to tell us everything about him?  mightn't he only need
>>>to tell us all we need to live a wonderful, flourishing life?
>
>>Then it's *NOT* his autobiography.  That was my point.
>
>  fine, but i don't think it matters.

Then why did you bring it up?

>>>>Why are they wrong or "perverted" while you are right?
>>>
>>>  what i said was that they have perverted the essential essence of 
>>>jesus.  the jw's regularly re-write the bible to fit their arbitrary
>>>feelings about life and the mormons have added tons of stuff that i'm
>>>just not going to go into.
>
>>But, what if they were "inspired"?  Who are you to tell them differently?
>>Where is your *proof* that they weren't "inspired"?
>
>  none, i just don't believe it.  

Then you might be damned to hell for all eternity.

>                                  my disbelief in the mormons [i assume
>you aren't going to argue on behalf of the jw's here. :) ]

My, your religious bigotry shows through nice and clear here.  Perhaps
you'd supply us with a prioritized list of "good Christian sects" in
declining order of "believability"?  Just so we'd know which ones were
*really* out in left field.

>                                                           is not
>based on proof like my faith in jesus is not based on proof.  what i
>look to beyond proof is what i trust in thinking the mormon's bible
>is irrelevant.

And since they have as much proof as you do they are just as right as you
are.


Gordon
-- 
The opinions expressed are my own, and not the beliefs or opinions
of whatever company you think I work for.  So there, thhhbbbt!
Message to Kodak:  Freedom for Dan Bredy.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc