If you do study the natural sciences, you will disbelieve in the god of the Bible, since they are mutually contradictory.
He commanded the genocide of the Canaanites:
See this link for those of you who are curious: Did God command genocide in the Bible?
Hagiographic hyperbole is a term used by philosopher Nicholas Wolterstorff to describe the kind of historical writing you see in the book of Joshua. The basic idea is that the accounts of Israel’s early battles in Canaan are narrated in a particular style, which is not intended to be literal in all of its details and contains a lot of hyperbole, formulaic language and literary expressions for rhetorical effect. We argue in our book that the evidence both from within the Bible and from other ancient Near Eastern conquest accounts supports this conclusion.
When biblical authors use phrases such as “They totally destroyed them, not sparing anyone that breathed” (Josh 11:11), which are later followed by passages that presuppose that the same areas are still inhabited by the same peoples, they cannot be affirming that literally every man, woman and child was killed at God’s command. It is a mistake to take them as affirming that Israel literally engaged in complete annihilation at God’s command. They are exaggerating for rhetorical effect.
I don't consider it spam by simply talking about one's spirituality. I think the guy is serious, and judging from the replies, others think so too.The same could be said of all the other spam we get here.
If people don't report what annoys them then there is zero chance of change. If they do report then at least mods become aware and might, just might, make a change that suits the person who made the report.
But you can't win if you don't play.![]()
Care to support any of those assertions without begging the question?God is love, consciousness, and good,
And what "self-evident" intent and purpose does the world around us express? And are you able to support that assertion with something other than question-begging?It is self evident that the world around us exists, that we are a part of it and that it is impossible to get something from nothing. The root word being "thing". As such it is only logical to assume that the world around us has always existed or that there is an eternal God that has always existed and that this God maintains the self evident intent and purpose the world around us expresses.
S being what?S is distributed over S.
How do you get from the previous assertion to this conclusion?This is how the self is S,
What is S? And how can you prove that "nowhere is S absent"?and since nowhere is S absent, He must be in me.
Which means what exactly in English? (I'm assuming that is the language you're speaking here?)And He is therefore "I" as spirit and non-"I", or "God" and non-"God" merged to become the one that distributes over the one.
I think we can define reality ourselves, but okay, where exactly does God state what reality is?Reality being defined according to God.
You didn't explain, you stated without any actual support for the claim.As I already explained, evil does not exist, it is the absence of God in man's heart, God is love, consciousness, and good.
I'm sure that means something to you but it doesn't actually answer any of the questions I have asked. Nor, in fact, does any of your post.I am that light which shines in darkness.
S being what?
How do you get from the previous assertion to this conclusion?
What is S? And how can you prove that "nowhere is S absent"?
Which means what exactly in English? (I'm assuming that is the language you're speaking here?)
I think we can define reality ourselves, but okay, where exactly does God state what reality is?
You didn't explain, you stated without any actual support for the claim.
Care to provide anything that supports your claim - and again, no question-begging please.
I'm sure that means something to you but it doesn't actually answer any of the questions I have asked. Nor, in fact, does any of your post.
You claimed that "God is love, consciousness, and good," yet you have to support those assertions.
You claimed that the world expresses a self-evident intent and purpose, which God maintains. Please support both of these assertions, first by detailing exactly what you see as being the self-evident intent and purpose, secondly why you think it self-evident, and thirdly please support the notion that God maintains this.
Please, no more of your barely-comprehensible drivel. Have the decency to use at least relatively plain English.
Spellbound, I asked for plain English.Mathematically, the ...
snipped for being non-plain English
...functional representations.
-Introduction to the CTMU
If you're talking about the monotheistic Abrahamic god, then aren't you placing limitations on that deity? Which is antithetical to the very concept of that deity. An omnipotent god is by definition without limits, including those of morality.But you are not "God" if you are evil
If you're talking about the monotheistic Abrahamic god, then aren't you placing limitations on that deity? Which is antithetical to the very concept of that deity. An omnipotent god is by definition without limits, including those of morality.
And if we're talking non-monotheistic conceptions of god, then you're not accounting for the nuance and variety present in polytheism.
In both cases, your statement fails.
If you do study the natural sciences, you will disbelieve in the god of the Bible, since they are mutually contradictory.
But you're separating good from evil. If your god only creates good but evil exists, then you need a creator of evil. You are implying a poly-creator.I am not talking about non-monotheistic conceptions of god.