Religion II

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by hcap

Did you happen to delete boxcar as well?

No...but that's next on my "to-do" list.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

According to genesis, not evolution. Learn to think.

Besides you are ducking the issue of love and compassion.

As usual.

Not in evolution theory, also? Humans preceded animals? Think about it. (On second thought, don't. Your mind is totally shot!)

I'm "ducking" your non sequitur that didn't have anything to do with my analogy.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

What makes you think they didn't understand? Adam was no intellectual slouch.

What do you think his IQ was? Whatever. It takes more than intelligence. It takes data, lots of it. Adam could have just been a primate, the ancestor not only of men but of bonobos, chimpanzees, orangutans and gorillas.

By the way, why did God need one of Adam's ribs to make Eve? Wouldn't a diety know that all it takes is a DNA swab from his cheek?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Hcap...have you any knowledge of "cults", and how they operate? Boxcar is a brainwashed "cult-member", to whom God's inexcusable behavior towards his "children" seems perfectly acceptable...because it is perfectly "holy". When you are a brainwashed cult-member...it appears "holy" to you that an "everloving parent" would go into a rage and lash out against a disobedient child...banishing the kid to a torturous life for all eternity.

And, when you are a brainwashed cult-member...you never bother to ask yourself the obvious main question: "WHY does God, our "everloving Father", expect us to be "perfect", to BEGIN with? Why does he seem to lack the patience and the understanding that the world's OTHER parents are asked to use when dealing with their OWN children? When you go into a rage and severely punish a disobeying kid...aren't you being the opposite of "loving"? Is that what "holiness" is all about?

Sadly...Boxcar is beyond help, and must be left to his own...lest his disease be contagious, and infect the rest of us here. Let the posters beware.

**EDITOR'S NOTE** THIS POST, ALTHOUGH IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S FROM HCAP, is actually from THASKALOS...who thought he was replying to hcap's original post (which is now gone), but was mistakenly in EDIT MODE and replaced hcap's words with his own. Rookie moderator mistake. Sorry for any inconvenience.

It appears you're a rookie in a lot more than just the moderating dept.

First of all, God is not everyone God, let alone everyone's heavenly Father.

Matt 22:31-32
31 "But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read that which was spoken to you by God, saying, 32 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living. "
NASB

We are expected to be perfect because our Creator is. If anyone hopes to see God and dwell with him for all eternity, he must be as perfect (holy) as he is; for without holiness no man will see God (Heb 12:14) And God has provided a spiritual remedy for all men in Christ.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

What do you think his IQ was? Whatever. It takes more than intelligence. It takes data, lots of it. Adam could have just been a primate, the ancestor not only of men but of bonobos, chimpanzees, orangutans and gorillas.

By the way, why did God need one of Adam's ribs to make Eve? Wouldn't a diety know that all it takes is a DNA swab from his cheek?

Adam has enough "data" to know and practice botany and taxonomy.

Since Adam was created without any sin or corruption and there was no darkness in him, I'd say his IQ was probably off the charts.

God's thoughts and ways are not like ours. Furthermore, would the ancients understand what DNA is? On the other hand, they would understand what a rib is and what that action symbolized.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by boxcar

It appears you're a rookie in a lot more than just the moderating dept.

First of all, God is not everyone God, let alone everyone's heavenly Father.

Matt 22:31-32
31 "But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read that which was spoken to you by God, saying, 32 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living. "
NASB

We are expected to be perfect because our Creator is. If anyone hopes to see God and dwell with him for all eternity, he must be as perfect (holy) as he is; for without holiness no man will see God (Heb 12:14) And God has provided a spiritual remedy for all men in Christ.

NO ONE is "perfect"...and this includes our "creator"...as well as Jesus Christ.

How "perfect" was God in selecting the Israelis as his "chosen people"...when THEY were the ones who ultimately rejected his only son as their "Messiah" -- even though he lived and walked among them? And...how "perfect" was God's decision to spare Noah's family from the cataclysmic disaster...when all that came of it was a society even MORE "sinful" than the one before?

And...how "perfect" was the Jesus who verbally reprimanded a bystander who dared to call him "good"?

If this is what you call "perfection"...then, your standards on the matter are mighty low.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

NO ONE is "perfect"...and this includes our "creator"...as well as Jesus Christ.

How "perfect" was God in selecting the Israelis as his "chosen people"...when THEY were the ones who ultimately rejected his only son as their "Messiah" -- even though he lived and walked among them? And...how "perfect" was God's decision to spare Noah's family from the cataclysmic disaster...when all that came of it was a society even MORE "sinful" than the one before?

And...how "perfect" was the Jesus who verbally reprimanded a bystander who dared to call him "good"?

If this is what you call "perfection"...then, your standards on the matter are mighty low.

God's PLAN decreed in eternity is perfect. Since all human beings are sinners, could God have chosen a perfect a nation of perfect human beings to fulfill his purpose for mankind? If so, which nation?

God spared Noah and his family so that God could fulfill the promise God made to Satan after the Fall (Gen 3:15). Again...a perfect plan, since the promise was fulfilled.

And I have explained LK 18:18 many times. And my interpretation harmonizes with the rest of scripture (cf. 2Cor 5:21; Isa 53:9-12; 1Pet 3:18), whereas yours does not. And besides all this, God said the following only about Jesus:

Matt 17:5
5 While he was still speaking, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them; and behold, a voice out of the cloud, saying, "This is My beloved Son, with whom I am well-pleased; listen to Him!"
NASB

God has never told anyone else in scripture that he was "well pleased" with him.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Not in evolution theory, also? Humans preceded animals? Think about it. (On second thought, don't. Your mind is totally shot!)

I'm "ducking" your non sequitur that didn't have anything to do with my analogy.

Originally Posted by hcap

According to genesis, not evolution. Learn to think.

Besides you are ducking the issue of love and compassion. As usual.

I said you were a cat lover. I am assuming your cats are domestic, not lions, tigers or leopards? Man domesticated cats and dogs, but the "wild" species they originated from should not be considered the same as today's domesticated species, and domesticated animals did not "precede" man.

Your domestic cats are no longer that wild species. In fact animal husbandry altered how domesticated animals behaved. And looked. Dogs are no longer wolves!. Yes their are genetic similarities, but your pussycats will not eat you. At least I hope not.

Mankind is required to "tame" them. Therefore man should be thought of as a major evolutionary factor in where cats and dogs are at today.

So yes humanity, organized in social groups, had to come first. Before the wild species could be tamed.

Agriculture altered vegetables.

However you are still ducking how your version of god is appears to be lacking love, compassion and mercy

[hcap]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

No...but that's next on my "to-do" list.

You got your hands full. You can keep him around for comic relief if you want.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Yes, it takes you to the post that thaskalos told you he thought he was replying, but was actually editing your post...so his words are there, but it's your picture and name on it...

I do understand it is his. But I am not clear om why when I click on the "view post" of Gus's reply, wanting to quote me, but is in fact his, I am taken to evidently his post with my name on it.?

Looks like some other hidden malfunction occurred. That's why I joked this "religious" thread was screwed for "eternity". Metaphysically speaking of course.

[hcap]

Btw, when you click on view post, your taken to post#7118

Check it out and please explain.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

I said you were a cat lover. I am assuming your cats are domestic, not lions, tigers or leopards? Man domesticated cats and dogs, but the "wild" species they originated from should not be considered the same as today's domesticated species, and domesticated animals did not "precede" man.

Your domestic cats are no longer that wild species. In fact animal husbandry altered how domesticated animals behaved. And looked. Dogs are no longer wolves!. Yes their are genetic similarities, but your pussycats will not eat you. At least I hope not.

Mankind is required to "tame" them. Therefore man should be thought of as a major evolutionary factor in where cats and dogs are at today.

So yes humanity, organized in social groups, had to come first. Before the wild species could be tamed.

Agriculture altered vegetables.

However you are still ducking how your version of god is appears to be lacking love, compassion and mercy

Again, you fail to understand scripture. In the beginning before the Fall, all animals were tame. There were no carnivores upon the earth until after the sin entered the world.

Gen 1:29-31
29 Then God said, "Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; 30 and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food ";and it was so.
NASB

Moreover, in the creation account Adam is created after all the animals and is told to rule over them.

So...forget your fake science. I'm guided by scripture.

Moreover, even your theory about what came first doesn't square with Darwinianism. Evolution demands that higher life forms (e.g. humans) evolved from lower life forms (animals).

Also, it doesn't follow logically that man had to precede any animal upon this earth to "tame" them.

Of course, what is interesting is that in evolution theory, man necessarily followed all the wild, flesh-eating, blood-hungry beasts. It's quite amazing that all the wild, fully-developed carnivorous beasts upon the earth weren't able to exterminate the far weaker humans on the evolutionary chain very early in our evolutionary processes. How did mankind manage to survive the "law of the jungle"? How did the human race pull that stunt off when the earth was filled with wise, developed and experienced predators that greatly outnumbered weaponless, defenseless, utterly helpless humans? I mean it must have taken the human race millions of years to come up with the idea of the first spear or bow and arrow, right? Talk about "shooting fish in a barrel"! When humans first came unto the scene we could liken them to little babies tossed out in the middle of the jungle surrounded by wild, hungry, voracious beasts on all sides. How did any of those babies manage to survive?

Any ideas, Humpty?

Finally, I'm not ducking your non sequitur about God's love or mercy. It doesn't apply to my pre-Fall analogy, especially since God manifested his love in the creation process itself.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by bollixed_up_car

Again, you fail to understand scripture. In the beginning before the Fall, all animals were tame. There were no carnivores upon the earth until after the sin entered the world.

Scripture is nor a reasonable explanation of the origination of species or life.

Who cares? Except you.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Scripture is nor a reasonable explanation of the origination of species or life.

Who cares? Except you.

Scripture is infinitely more reasonable than your fake science.

Meanwhile, your "reasonable" explanation for life on this planet has no answers for how it was possible at all for the earliest and weakest humans to survive, let alone thrive, in an exceedingly hostile world surrounded by wild, dangerous, hungry carnivores on all sides who were much stronger, faster and naturally equipped to kill. This kind of scenario for survival of our species defies all reason! How did humans pull it off, Humpty?

Musta been a miracle or two somewhere along the line, heh?

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by hcap

Btw, when you click on view post, your taken to post#7118

Check it out and please explain.

If you're talking about the "View Post" button next to the name in the quote box, it's doing exactly what it is suppose to do. I guess I didn't explain myself well enough. I don't know how to explain it any better.

I can confirm that all is working properly. It's just that thaskalos did something via human error that is confusing.