Simple math questions for Christians

Hey hey. How do you know he's a shovenist pig. Maybe he's just popular with the ladies.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

God's big penis

Flores, I do believe you are correct! Now I understand why Xian men feel inadequate next to God, and Xian women fear him!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Then it must be quite possible that God is deceiving you? Perhaps that the concepts of Heaven and Hell are actually reversed...? When you start asserting that God must transcend natural law - or more specifically, God is unknowable - you are necessarily starting down a slippery slope.

Fine then... if we assume the laws of math are only subject to what we know in "our cosmos", is it possible that in another cosmos 10^3 != 1000 or perhaps the linear combination theorem could be easily falsified? If something along those lines proved true, how would that impact us?

Regards,
mrmufin

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I'm glad you came around. We agree - a god wouldn't have a sex. That's stupid. I just happen to think that the whole god idea is obtuse - I'm not Christian - I don't call it anything, least of all father. Yes I agree the Christian god appears to be a male chauvinist pig. I don't see how that is mush different than the Islamic or Jewish representations? Please elaborate on one or the other or both (if you have time).

I wonder why God doesn't let women have 4 men as husbands? Let me guess because there’s 4x’s the number of women in the world?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Come on Flores.

 

Good Point!

 

A God who is deceitful would not rely so much on our ability to realize the truth. I would expect much more miraculous events and other forms of "manipulation" to keep us believing the lie? But that is really a little outrageous, since we believe in a Creator God, which would imply He is working against himself. And then Jesus was the one who showed us the truth: "that a house divided in itself cannot stand". Jesus was referring to the father of lies, Satan, as the one who delight in deception. And Jesus claimed his authority came directly from God. Therefore we know God is opposed so deception: He would not expose His own deception if He was trying to hide it.

Furthermore, unknowable refers to our limited mental capacity. Many things we only "know" as mysteries. Some become clear, others not. We try to compensate for discrepancies by formulating theories that satisfy all the data. Religion could be called "theory of God" (or Theology). But there is a difference between theology and the practice of faith. You would like the two to stand opposed (faith vs. knowledge), but they need not. What we know could be sufficient to live with what we don't know. People 4000 years ago did not know about the science behind weather forecasting - but they could read the air, the wind, and the signs well enough to predict rain. They did not need to be able to explain how rain forms to appreciate it.

We can only know nature by nature and thinking about nature. Different rules apply to spiritual things, and we know God by thinking about Him. What is unknowable today might be knowable tomorrow and known in theory the day after. Nothing prevents us from knowing the sides of God that are within our reach. To say that He is ultimately unknowable or should be scientifically discernable constitutes a tunnel-vision that might prevent you from seeing what you need to grasp even the basics.

 

God never allowed a man to marry four women as a general rule. It's an extremely restricted case and it requires the approval of all women. Please look at the Quranic verse below relevant to this issue.

The Women
[4.3] And if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards orphans, then marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice (between them), then (marry) only one or what your right hands possess; this is more proper, that you may not deviate from the right course.

Now, you'll find everyone reciting this Quranic verse while ommiting the first sentence. The PREREQUISITE for qualification for this is that a man has a wife that died and he ended up remarrying but he feels that his orphan children are not being justly treated because the new wife prefers her won children. Now you tell me, what would you do in that instance? What would you do Michael, if I was your wife, I gave you two beautifull children that look just like you, then I died when they were young. You went and remarried and your new wife gave you three more kids and started treating your first kids as inferior and Cinderella like maids. The Quran gives you a solution. The solution is to remarry again, and in that case there might be enough mothers in the house for the orphans to start feeling justice. Of course god tells us that if we fear we can't be just, then don't marry, and that's always an option.

We are responsible on how we interpret the Quran. If you wish USE the Quran to satisfy all your agendas, then go right ahead, you're RESPONSIBLE for your choices. But don't blame the Quran in advance for your ill actions. The Quran is not a license to act, it's merely a guide.

 

My friend,
Since you have asked, I should tell you the reason that I understand. How do you write your name? Michael *lastname*, which is your father's name? ( some exceptions goes with their mother's name) It is universaly same for all religions, nations, countries etc etc. Now if some one got Four Wives all the children can have one father, correct? and one mother. Right?

Now, if you have one woman with Four Men, there is no telling who's child is who? Who would be his father? since all four men are sleeping with one woman. Do you see a point?

Men having 4 wives, is not that simple either, there is a whole set of laws that he needs to follow. Now who follows and who doesn't? it is a different story. Just like any other religion, some follows the laws and some don't. Islam is no excetpion. I hope you get the idea.

 

What makes your assumptions and hypothesis of God more valid than mine or anyone elses? Your beliefs? Does God speak directly with you?

My point is simply that what you expect (more miraculous if deceitful, etc.) simply may not be, if, for no other reason than God maintains unknowable and entirely unobservable attributes. When compounded with His alleged abilities (creating Adam from dust, banging out the cosmos in 6 days) along with his not-so-friendly tendencies (a horrific flood wherein only a few humans were spared, commanding the Isrealites to kill the Amalekites, etc.) and considering the atrocious events and conditions which He allegedly has the capacity to control but does nothing about (tornados, turbulence, epilepsy, etc) it is less than prudent to rule out deceitfulness.

If you (like many Christians) would like to write off the afforementioned events as purely (or even partly) mythological - or in any manner less than forthright - guess what we're back to: deceitful or fictional; take your pick.

Hmmm.... and I thought that "house divided" speech was attributed to Abraham Lincoln.

And deceitful is a plausible hypothesis which satisifies the "data". As does fictional.(BTW, "data" - in any scientific sense - does not represent itself differently based on its audience.)

And the deceitful hypothesis is further supported by God's warning to Adam regarding the fruit from the tree of knowledge: if eaten, "surely you shall die in the same day." Adam ate the fruit, and guess what...? Right - he did not die on the same day. Deceitful is even further supported in Genesis by God's lack of forewarning about the serpent. If God designed both Adam and the serpent, why no forewarning? Was God unaware of its deceitful tendencies (making Him less than perfect) or was God being deceitful by lack of forewarning to Adam?

I didn't say that they were opposed, but they are very different.

Just "thinking about" nature doesn't cut it, Jenyar. We understand nature by making observations of nature, forming hypotheses about nature, making predictions about nature using those hypotheses and testing those hypotheses with further observations. Since we're unable to directly observe God we're unable to test any hypothesis about God, therefore my hypothesis about a deceitful God is every bit as plausible as your hypothesis about a forthright God.

If I recall correctly, that process is called "imagination" - particularly when the subject of thought is unobservable and undetectable.

Nothing aside from His undetectability, you mean.

My scientific "tunnel-vision" has served me quite well thus far, thank you. Check.

Regards,
mrmufin

 

Personally, I would divorce the second wife and marry the third. The solution in the Qur’an is not always a solution, for example,e: and if the second wife does the same? Marry a third. And if the third wife does the same – marry a fourth. And if the fourth wife does the same – marry a fifth. And if the fifth wife does the same – marry a sixth. And and and and and and . . . . .

Of course anything can “make sense” if you want it to.

The reason I mentioned the marriage is because my Muslim friend here, when asked by me, why isn't it the other way around? Why not 4 men for each wife? He replied – because there are 4 times as many women in the world! Too funny

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Speaking of which. Do you think it would be OK for women to take more than one husband? Certainly some Tibetan peoples allow for this to occur – so it can and does easily work socially. Could it be that the 4 wives is in the Qur’an because it was custom pre-Mohammad for ME peoples to have the option to take 4 wives and as such made it's way into the Qu'ran?

 

Markx – hello, yes I was given my fathers surname. However, it wouldn't matter to me if it were the other way around. As a matter of fact, as one can NEVER be sure of the father and is ALWAYS sure of the mother. Maybe it makes more sense to take the Mothers surname? As for the Universality of taking the father’s name - that is not so.

Women in Kham and Tibet can marry several brothers of the same family. Usually the reasons for this are economic (marrying the brother keeps the family property intact - and in Tibet there's not so much to go around). This is practiced today. My point being, anything is possible socially. If the number of women in the world began to decline until there were only 10% women. You can bet that society would restructure to accommodate this.

I Believe people in Arabia were taking four wives before the Qu’ran was written - I wonder what the set of laws were that the man needed to follow then? The same or similar I would venture. What I find interesting is that when looking at another religion one can come to the conclusion that “the Christian god appears to be a male chauvinist pig” while when ascertaining one’s own religion (where the choice of what is right and what is wrong has already been predetermined by someone else millennia ago) the same person can not see the chauvinist side to their own beliefs. Obviously societies were typically controlled by men. Men typically like to exchange their older women for “newer models” when they (the man) gets older with his wife. This is so typical that we, as a society, has a term for this second younger wife – Trophy Wife. Its been practised in many cultures for millennia. My Iranian friend said that most common in Iran was 1 wife. Those that took additional wives typically married a 20 year old when they were 20 then they took a 20 year old when they were 30 then at 40 - they (the man) took a 20 year old. Then at 50 they (the man) took a 20 year old.

Sounds like typically male behavior to me – however, once it’s in the “Good Book” then its right-as-rain. Nevertheless, it really can be right-as-rain. That’s the thing with societies – its what they the society decide it correct, is what is correct. For example, some people give the Taliban grief because they made the women in that society cover themselves from head to toe. Yet, these same people will not allow me to walk down to McDonalds buck-naked! Nor will they let my partner walk around the beach without her top on! Hypocrites!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I think you see my overall point.

 

You are empowered by god to do as you wish and he will judge you based on the ability he gave you. He told you to be just and that's all that matters. If you feel strongly that marrying two women at the same time was a just thing to do then do it.

Let me ask you about another scenario. Let's say for example that you were married to me and I ended up getting really sick and confined to bed, and you were only 25 years old. Let's say that I told you that I want you to remarry and have children, but I don't want you to divorce me in my condition. Let's say I ask you to do that and go on with your life, what would you do? What i would do is weigh my options really good. First I would consider if I'm a person who is vulnerable to cheat on my wife because sex happens to be important to me. Divorcing my ill wife wouldn't even cross my mind, and if I as a young MAN biologically need a female companion, then I'll remarry if my first wife is letting me do it. I'll try to be just to both and do my best and to god is my final judgement.

Now, let me tell you the female prespective. I don't care what other females on this board will say, but sex to a female is a very low priority. We care more for love and companionship. Sex to us is a gift that we give males to show them how much we love them. Satisfying our orgasms is least on our minds. Because of that, a women wouldn't not biologically fit in a relationship with more than one man, because the sexual demand would be very high and it can not be satisfied. For me to sleep with four men is rape or hell. I simply can't do it, but a man can easily sleep with four women. In addition, the women body is a reciever, while a man body is an ejaculator. If you ever work in farming, you'll know that the land can only recieve one type of seed for a good harvest. We don't throw on a land cron seed, tomatoe seed, cucumber see, all in the same time and hope that one will harvest properly. Animals are similar. A male animal won't touch a female once she is pregnant from another animal. Also consider that females get pregnant with sex, meaning that if I was married to four men that I would spend the majority of my life pregnant and unable to have sex. I don't know about others, but when I'm pregnant, I don't like having sex at all. This is unfair, because four men will be expected to forget sex for the most part of their life. Do I make sense.

 

Flores

Do I make sense.

Not as yet, but keep trying - perhaps someday.

 

This is exactly why you should study Bhagavad Gita, where you will understand actually who and what God is.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the belief that Jesus is God. Why? Because he is as good as God.
If you recall from the Qur’an, Allah instructed all those present to bow down and worship Adam, such reverence is either for God or His representative. Jesus was such a person.

Let’s say you have one lit candle (original) and two unlit ones. If you use the first candle to light the other two, has the fire become divided, or does the other two candles have the same potency as the original candle?

Love

Jan Ardena.

 

Re: Re: Simple math questions for Christians

I'll google Mr. Gita and see what he have to say on this controvortial subject. Thanks for the lead.

 

Re: Re: Re: Simple math questions for Christians

"Bow down to submission" same thing. Allah instructed them to bow to Adam. He didn't say bow to Adam because i told you to.

Well, this is the whole point, there is no transferance of authority, everything is on the absolute platform. If you believe Allah is an Absolute Being, then that means His words and actions are non-different to His-Self. Adam was therefore as perfect as Allah.

Again you've missed the point. Ultimately He defied God, but he defied Adam, as Adam was put on the same level as God, by God. So again, there was no qualititive difference between Adam and God.

But what happens to the little lights? As they are from an infinate source, they must also be infinate, otherwise the source is not infinate.

Check your PM's.

Love

Jan Ardena.

Love

 

Actually, the only reason they bowed to Adam is because god asked them to. If you were with them Jan, and Adam asked you to bow, would you have bowed? Now, if god asked you to, of course you would? Would you bow to Satan if god asked you to? I would...would you bow to an ant if god asked you to? Yes. In the Quranic verse god is the one that asked others to bow, and the importance is placed on god who originated the request. God could have asked them to bow to a pig and the outcome would have been the same. If God wanted to empower Adam with his same power, he would have asked Adam to ask the others to bow to him, but that didn't happen, Adam never asked for a bow or even expected a bow, Adam didn't even understand the meaning of the bow, and I doubt anybody would have bowed if the command didn't come directly from god.

Adam is by no means as perfect as god. The aboslute truth is one and may not be divided. There are lots of lights out there and all of them are fake.....When the true light shines Jan, all the other lights would blend and fade in it's presence, while when they shine alone in darkness, they're overwhelmed like a little star in midnight darkness. When we die and go back to god, then you can use your argument that it's one perfect platform, but for now, we are alive and seperate and we are by no means perfect. We are speckles.

Satan didn't defy Adam, He defied god first. And all humans that follow Satan are in turn defying god. Adam have no power over Satan. Adam can not do anything to compel Satan to bow to him, while god can break satan's neck and our necks to make us bow and that's exactly what happened, god condemened Satan and his followers to lowly fire and only allowed them the respite of time to proof to god that they are not the only bad ones, that others are just as bad, so he Satan and his followers are determined to bring as many souls down with them and they are all going down for their defiance.

The little lights eventually go back to the infinite light, they are never lost, and just like the gems do, the impurities will settle to the scum of the pot and the valualbe ones will surface and float with the good stuff. The lights are never lost, they are just getting sorted by genuinity.

J

The ultimate infinite light is not within us, it's our submission to oit's presence that saves us and puts us in it's mercy, love, and compassion. Our submission to the light fills us with the light. Our defiance to the light throws us back to the darkness.. We will never be gods, but we can be clear enough to reflect god's light. Or we can be opaque enough and full of fake candles and god's light will never enter us. Imagine this, a man who defied god's light and said he doesn't need it and lit a fire out of wood. The fire stayed on and guided the man throughout the night, then a rain storm came and took the light away, then what is the man left with.....nothing really....The man never had light from the start, he was misguided by his own light that is not designed to be a stand alone, that is designed to be exhuasted if it was burned too much on it's own.

 

But why did God ask them to?

For what reason would God request such action?

You seem to be missing the point. Why do you think God asked them to bow to Adam?

That stands to reason as Adam was a brand new concept from the others perspective.

He must have been at one time before falling down.

I didn't say we were perfect, you must have misunderstood.

I am not disputing that.

Love

Jan Ardena.

 

Frankly I don't know. And imagining the situation isn't going to compare with real life. That side, I would imagine that if there is no hope of my wife getting better. Lets say terminal cancer, then I would spend the last of her days with her. If my wife’s situation was such that she was expected to last only a year then I would remain by her side. Which is usually the case. If she had some sort of illness that was going to take her life over a long period then I’d have to weigh the situation. I would never feel comfortable with two women as my wives so I’d either divorce my wife or I would not. If I didn’t then I would remain faithful. If I didn’t think I could remain faithful then I would reconsider divorcing her.

I see your point but this has avoided my question. Which is: Is it OK for a female to take more than one husband? Lets set up the scenario.
1) A Singaporean women really enjoys sex. She would like to have sex once a day. Her husband works 18hours and has sex with her on average 10 times per month (not unusual for Singaporean men). So is it OK for her to take an additional husband if her husband is OK with that?
2) A women is marred as the fourth wife to her 50 year old husband. It was an arranged marriage such that the woman’s family has gained some sheep. Her husband has a stroke at 53 (not uncommon). Afterwards it is found that he can never have children. She wants children – can she take an additional husband and have 2? What if she just wants to have sex once in awhile – then can she have a second husband?

You see, it’s really not that simple. When a book says a man can have four wives – well you can bet that book was written by a man! Because for every case where a man can justify a relatively reasonable situation where he should have another wife there is a counter situation where the woman could reasonably have a second husband.

But what happens is we look to an ancient book, take our brains out and put them on a shelf, and then do what it, the religious book, says is correct. The truth of the matter if there was a god (and I don’t think there is) it would be up to the individual woman and the individual men (in the case of a woman with four husbands). They are the ones being judged so let them do what ever they feel they want to do. I mean it’s their souls and they are adults so they can do what they wish so long as they don’t harm others. Ahh, but society doesn’t work like that does it? No, it’s run on tradition and what is “sociably” acceptable (which in many cases means referring to a religious book and then making an interpretation/having power to make the decisions FOR the individual). But the truth of it is – if there is a god, then these ADULT people should do what they want and be judged by god – No? Try telling that to an afghani woman wanting to leave a husband she hates because he beats her. It isn’t going to happen. Why? Because people are governed by their culture – religion just fills the spaces in-between and allows for (usually men) to justify taking the decision from the individual person and putting it in the hands of institution (religious or otherwise). Sounds pretty much like any society whether Christian, Muslim, Hindi, none religious, Shinto, etcetera.

Many animals have no idea if the female is pregnant or not pregnant and will mate with any available female. Some females store male sperm for later use. Some male sperm have evolved to clot (presumable in the hopes of blocking rival males sperm). It really just depends on the animal.

Yes but this is your decision. Others may feel differently and should be free to choose what they would like to do with whom and how many they would like to do it with – so long as it doesn’t harm another. Ie: A woman with more than one man or A man with a man or A woman with a woman. By making it so that they can not make their own choice in the matter then one is really “playing god”. They should make their decision and be judged for it by god. It certainly doesn’t seem right that the decision is made for them (by an ancient book) – how is god then to “test” them if they can not give the answer because society has banned it? And how many times have I heard that god “Likes to Test people” (why that’s how come a person is born missing an arm of course or this or that). For this reason (if I were religious) I would look upon any religious text with a high degree of suspicion – they’re really oxymoronic if you think about it religiously (that is THEY the book make the decision not the individual). However, they make perfect sense politely – that is as a powerful form of Social Control. Which is really what its all about.

Also, sex can be performed without the woman getting pregnant. That is, just for the enjoyment of having sex. So she needn’t be pregnant at all.

And, I certainly didn’t find it surprising when my Iranian friend said most Iranians have 1 wife. As I feel that is most natural. And when he said the older man continues to exchange for the younger ones with the fourth just happening to occur at the mans age 50 (if taking a new wife once every 10 years occurs starting at 20) he said so with a laugh. Being a man we both knew what that laugh meant and it had nothing to do with children being loved or cancer or anything of the sort.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

This also doesn’t surprise me (nor most people on this board) because this is what men do – it just so happens some men were clever enough to put it in a book and indoctrinate the women so that they also believe likewise – a clever man to convince women that the taking of Trophy Wives is an act loved by god!
(I was thinking Mormons

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Now you're talking....
I agree completely. Sharia and any effort to implement the book of god as a deterministic code for us to live by is bull shit and undermining god's authority and judgement. I believe that reading the Quran and the bible is only meant for the individual enlightment and not for the group wellfair. People should be free to do as they wish, no cutting hands, stoning, judging, none of that, and when they die, let god tell them and judge them. I have said many times before that if I discovered myself to be addictive to stealing that I would myself cut my own hand to reform myself. Just like I put a string on my finger to remember an appointment. A society cutting my own hands while I haven't understood my crime will only make me a liar next, a murderer, ect...