How Jesus became god'... from not being one. Bart Ehrman.

[esalla]

All my life I've been told God is real, he is loving, he is perfect, and he is watching over us. So far as I can see, none of that is true. Maybe God's not evil but he created a world filled with it. You're always saying there is a reason, what is the reason for COVID

You've never explained who explained God is real, he is loving, he is perfect, and he is watching over us. However, you say that to ding. too (w/o explanation), when he said, " Your judgments don't seem to assume God is perfect. Your judgments seem to assume God is imperfect."

I have to agree that you complain against God, blame God, and assume he is imperfect and give no explanation.

If I asked you about God would you describe him as is real, as loving, as perfect, and as watching over us?

I've been told God is perfect but His actions doesn't fit my definition of perfect. To me perfection requires no change and, IMHO, God has evolved like everything else.

What actions are you aware of God performing?

 

[ding]

Am I criticizing anyone? Am I saying I was better? Am I suggesting it should have been done differently? No.

Your judgement is to accept genocide, pain, and suffering. That is your right.

In my judgement, those things are wrong. Is there a good reason that is the only way things can be designed to be? None that I can see. Now do you understand?

Holy shit, there you go again with your dishonest arguments.

No, I don't understand. You start with an argument you don't believe to arrive at what you do believe. Totally illogical. Doesn't make any sense at all. It's a self fulfilling prophecy that ass fucks logic and reason.

P.S. and you are still judging God. So just to be clear, you believe you know better than the creator of existence, right?

Assuming God exists (do I always have to start off with that?) and He is perfect, I certainly see lots of imperfection in this world. I'd judge He's not living up to his potential. Would creation fall apart if there were no viruses?

Your judgments don't seem to assume God is perfect. Your judgments seem to assume God is imperfect.

So is your assumption that if God is perfect (whatever that means) that what He created should be perfect too? There are a couple of ways I can approach this.

What God created is perfect for its purpose and objective which is the Catholic thought.
That with infinite wisdom and goodness God freely willed to create a world "in a state of journeying" towards its ultimate perfection. In God's plan this process of becoming involves the appearance of certain beings and the disappearance of others, the existence of the more perfect alongside the less perfect, both constructive and destructive forces of nature. With physical good there exists also physical evil as long as creation has not reached perfection. For almighty God. . ., because he is supremely good, would never allow any evil whatsoever to exist in his works if he were not so all-powerful and good as to cause good to emerge from evil itself.

Or Jewish thought that whatever imperfections which exist are imperfections of matter and consequence of free will. That whatever is formed of any matter receives the most perfect form possible in that species of matter: in each individual case the defects are in accordance with the defects of that individual matter and that these are very few and rare. Such that is cannot be said that God directly creates evil, or He has the direct intention to produce evil. That God only produces existence, and all existence is good. That the great evils which men cause to each other because of certain intentions, desires, opinions, or religious principles, originate in ignorance, which is absence of wisdom. The numerous evils to which individual persons are exposed are due to the defects existing in the persons themselves. We suffer from the evils which we, by our own free will, inflict on ourselves and ascribe them to God, who is far from being connected with them. Man himself is the author of this class of evils. The error of the ignorant goes so far as to say that God's power is insufficient, because He has given to this Universe the properties which they imagine cause these great evils.

But what struck me most about your post was your description that God is supposed to be perfect. Perfect what and what exactly does that mean to you? Because I think it is your misguided and biased perception of God which has you confused.

All my life I've been told God is real, he is loving, he is perfect, and he is watching over us. So far as I can see, none of that is true. Maybe God's not evil but he created a world filled with it. You're always saying there is a reason, what is the reason for COVID 19?

Seems to me that you blame God for the bad acts of man and imperfections of matter. Every living thing dies. It's a requirement for genesis to occur.

Tell me how it would work in your world if you were God.

The reason for Covid 19 is that it mutated. Viruses exist in nature and play a role in nature. They serve a purpose.

Funny how you want to blame God for the bad but aren't willing to give God credit for the good... which BTW dwarfs the bad. Unless of course you believe existence is bad.

I would not judge men when they die. No heaven and no hell. I would not intervene in human affairs.

I have an aquarium but I have no idea which goldfish are good and which are bad, I let them work it out for themselves. I do intervene if they get ill and ensure they have enough to eat because I like them.

Is that it? Nothing else? Get it all out in the open.

 

[alang1216]

Like Disraeli said, Christianity is completed Judaism. Jews didn't become monotheistic until Deutro-Isaiah, and since universalism is implicit in monotheism, Judaism became explicitly universal via Christianity.

I agree about Jewish monotheism but not the rest.

More trivia from Ehrman: Christianity began as a minor cult of Judaism but it soon diverged into two opposing camps centered on the question of did Christians have to first become Jews. The Christians in Israel believed so, those of the diaspora said no. It was Roman pagans that decided the issue by wiping out the Christian Jews of Jerusalem when the Jews revolted.

It was certainly trivial, since it's false. Few Christian Jews remained in Jerusalem by the time of the Revolt; they wer already scattered faer and wide, having been persecuted already, with most of them killed long before Paul was executed in Rome. The Jerusalem Jews themselves killed most of them, like his brother James and many others. The Second Jewish Revolt, the bar Kokhba revolt, finished the split and drove Christians out of the synagogues, also accompanied by massacres of Christians by Orthodox Jews and Pharisees, who made up most of the new 'Rabbis' running around. Christianity spread quickly and widely, as did most Jews who had converted.

You may be right about some of the timings since what I wrote was not just taken from Ehrman.

I think it is safe to say most Jews did not convert and became targets of Christians. Christianity grew by conversions of pagans. It was still a small minority of the Roman world until Constantine.

Erhman also has problems with timelines; it's one of the reasons he's easy to refute. And a lot of Jews did convert; there were a lot more Jews than the Jews of Jerusalem, and far more of them were alienated by the Temple Jews set up in power by Darius and the Persians; the racist Jews just never bothered to record their histories, since they were 'tainted' and of no worth, their only function to line the pockets of the 'real Jews' as determined by the 'pure' Jews. Certainly gentiels became converts, as I said Judaism became universal vis Christianity, , and they were already spread all over the Roman world before Constantine was even born. The only reason the malcontents and pagans snivel about 'Constantine' all the time is they think if they can peddle the nonsense he rewrote everything then whatever rubbish they fell like revising is valid as well, i.e. they're stupid and loony.

It is my understanding that Jews did NOT convert in large numbers. Got a link that says different?

How many Jews became Christians in the first century?

The failure of the Christian mission to the Jews1 David C Sim2 Australian Catholic University Research Associate: Department of New Testament Studies University of Pretoria​

Abstract This study examines the early Christian mission(s) to the Jews, and attempts to determine, albeit speculatively, the number of Jews in the Christian movement in the first century. It is argued that the combined Christian mission was marked by a distinct lack of success. Neither the Law-observant gospel of the Jerusalem church nor the Law-free gospel of the Hellenists and Paul made much impression upon the people of Israel. Throughout the first century the total number of Jews in the Christian movement probably never exceeded 1 000 and by the end of the century the Christian church was largely Gentile.

Rubbish. You're buying the myth that Jews only existed in Jerusalem and that only those who were the Orthodox were Jews. The Peanut Gallery can read Paul Johnson's History Of The Jews in tandem with James Carroll's criticism of the Catholic Church's antisemitism, Constantine's Sword, for good intro summaries of the conflict in that day before moving on to more detailed histories; the Jews were divided into several factions, not just Christians vs 'The' Jews, for one, and of course the ministry didn't start and end on the Temple steps, either. The Catholic conservatives never liked the idea of Jewish Christians, and neither did the Orthodox Jews who lost money and power to them; they both complimented each others' bigotry and malicious hatred of ' infidels'.

You're rewriting Christian history. I don't blame you

Like Disraeli said, Christianity is completed Judaism. Jews didn't become monotheistic until Deutro-Isaiah, and since universalism is implicit in monotheism, Judaism became explicitly universal via Christianity.

I agree about Jewish monotheism but not the rest.

More trivia from Ehrman: Christianity began as a minor cult of Judaism but it soon diverged into two opposing camps centered on the question of did Christians have to first become Jews. The Christians in Israel believed so, those of the diaspora said no. It was Roman pagans that decided the issue by wiping out the Christian Jews of Jerusalem when the Jews revolted.

It was certainly trivial, since it's false. Few Christian Jews remained in Jerusalem by the time of the Revolt; they wer already scattered faer and wide, having been persecuted already, with most of them killed long before Paul was executed in Rome. The Jerusalem Jews themselves killed most of them, like his brother James and many others. The Second Jewish Revolt, the bar Kokhba revolt, finished the split and drove Christians out of the synagogues, also accompanied by massacres of Christians by Orthodox Jews and Pharisees, who made up most of the new 'Rabbis' running around. Christianity spread quickly and widely, as did most Jews who had converted.

You may be right about some of the timings since what I wrote was not just taken from Ehrman.

I think it is safe to say most Jews did not convert and became targets of Christians. Christianity grew by conversions of pagans. It was still a small minority of the Roman world until Constantine.

Erhman also has problems with timelines; it's one of the reasons he's easy to refute. And a lot of Jews did convert; there were a lot more Jews than the Jews of Jerusalem, and far more of them were alienated by the Temple Jews set up in power by Darius and the Persians; the racist Jews just never bothered to record their histories, since they were 'tainted' and of no worth, their only function to line the pockets of the 'real Jews' as determined by the 'pure' Jews. Certainly gentiels became converts, as I said Judaism became universal vis Christianity, , and they were already spread all over the Roman world before Constantine was even born. The only reason the malcontents and pagans snivel about 'Constantine' all the time is they think if they can peddle the nonsense he rewrote everything then whatever rubbish they fell like revising is valid as well, i.e. they're stupid and loony.

It is my understanding that Jews did NOT convert in large numbers. Got a link that says different?

How many Jews became Christians in the first century?

The failure of the Christian mission to the Jews1 David C Sim2 Australian Catholic University Research Associate: Department of New Testament Studies University of Pretoria​

Abstract This study examines the early Christian mission(s) to the Jews, and attempts to determine, albeit speculatively, the number of Jews in the Christian movement in the first century. It is argued that the combined Christian mission was marked by a distinct lack of success. Neither the Law-observant gospel of the Jerusalem church nor the Law-free gospel of the Hellenists and Paul made much impression upon the people of Israel. Throughout the first century the total number of Jews in the Christian movement probably never exceeded 1 000 and by the end of the century the Christian church was largely Gentile.

Rubbish. You're buying the myth that Jews only existed in Jerusalem and that only those who were the Orthodox were Jews. The Peanut Gallery can read Paul Johnson's History Of The Jews in tandem with James Carroll's criticism of the Catholic Church's antisemitism, Constantine's Sword, for good intro summaries of the conflict in that day before moving on to more detailed histories; the Jews were divided into several factions, not just Christians vs 'The' Jews, for one, and of course the ministry didn't start and end on the Temple steps, either. The Catholic conservatives never liked the idea of Jewish Christians, and neither did the Orthodox Jews who lost money and power to them; they both complimented each others' bigotry and malicious hatred of ' infidels'.

I think you're attempting to rewrite early Christian history and I don't blame you for wanting to.

Off the top of my head: Christianity began as a Jewish cult but failed to attract many Jewish converts. Mark is aimed at Jews and makes Romans responsible for his death. Christians soon gave up and Matthew and Luke are aimed at pagan converts and shifts the blame from Rome to Jewish leaders. John is beginning to show the signs of future anti-semitism by shifting blame for Jesus' death to the Jewish people as a whole. Not a surprising trend since Christians lived in a Roman world and didn't enjoy great relations with Rome, early one. Blaming Romans for killing you messiah was very bad PR.

 

[alang1216]

Am I criticizing anyone? Am I saying I was better? Am I suggesting it should have been done differently? No.

Your judgement is to accept genocide, pain, and suffering. That is your right.

In my judgement, those things are wrong. Is there a good reason that is the only way things can be designed to be? None that I can see. Now do you understand?

Holy shit, there you go again with your dishonest arguments.

No, I don't understand. You start with an argument you don't believe to arrive at what you do believe. Totally illogical. Doesn't make any sense at all. It's a self fulfilling prophecy that ass fucks logic and reason.

P.S. and you are still judging God. So just to be clear, you believe you know better than the creator of existence, right?

Assuming God exists (do I always have to start off with that?) and He is perfect, I certainly see lots of imperfection in this world. I'd judge He's not living up to his potential. Would creation fall apart if there were no viruses?

Your judgments don't seem to assume God is perfect. Your judgments seem to assume God is imperfect.

So is your assumption that if God is perfect (whatever that means) that what He created should be perfect too? There are a couple of ways I can approach this.

What God created is perfect for its purpose and objective which is the Catholic thought.
That with infinite wisdom and goodness God freely willed to create a world "in a state of journeying" towards its ultimate perfection. In God's plan this process of becoming involves the appearance of certain beings and the disappearance of others, the existence of the more perfect alongside the less perfect, both constructive and destructive forces of nature. With physical good there exists also physical evil as long as creation has not reached perfection. For almighty God. . ., because he is supremely good, would never allow any evil whatsoever to exist in his works if he were not so all-powerful and good as to cause good to emerge from evil itself.

Or Jewish thought that whatever imperfections which exist are imperfections of matter and consequence of free will. That whatever is formed of any matter receives the most perfect form possible in that species of matter: in each individual case the defects are in accordance with the defects of that individual matter and that these are very few and rare. Such that is cannot be said that God directly creates evil, or He has the direct intention to produce evil. That God only produces existence, and all existence is good. That the great evils which men cause to each other because of certain intentions, desires, opinions, or religious principles, originate in ignorance, which is absence of wisdom. The numerous evils to which individual persons are exposed are due to the defects existing in the persons themselves. We suffer from the evils which we, by our own free will, inflict on ourselves and ascribe them to God, who is far from being connected with them. Man himself is the author of this class of evils. The error of the ignorant goes so far as to say that God's power is insufficient, because He has given to this Universe the properties which they imagine cause these great evils.

But what struck me most about your post was your description that God is supposed to be perfect. Perfect what and what exactly does that mean to you? Because I think it is your misguided and biased perception of God which has you confused.

All my life I've been told God is real, he is loving, he is perfect, and he is watching over us. So far as I can see, none of that is true. Maybe God's not evil but he created a world filled with it. You're always saying there is a reason, what is the reason for COVID 19?

Seems to me that you blame God for the bad acts of man and imperfections of matter. Every living thing dies. It's a requirement for genesis to occur.

Tell me how it would work in your world if you were God.

The reason for Covid 19 is that it mutated. Viruses exist in nature and play a role in nature. They serve a purpose.

Funny how you want to blame God for the bad but aren't willing to give God credit for the good... which BTW dwarfs the bad. Unless of course you believe existence is bad.

I would not judge men when they die. No heaven and no hell. I would not intervene in human affairs.

I have an aquarium but I have no idea which goldfish are good and which are bad, I let them work it out for themselves. I do intervene if they get ill and ensure they have enough to eat because I like them.

LOL so if you had a murdering goldfish you would just watch it kill the other fish

Very godlike

You have any extra meth?

You mention 'murdering goldfish' and ask ME about meth?

Not sure about goldfish but if I put two Siamese fighting fish together should I be surprised they tried to kill each other? Are they bad or are they just Siamese fighting fish?

 

[esalla]

Like Disraeli said, Christianity is completed Judaism. Jews didn't become monotheistic until Deutro-Isaiah, and since universalism is implicit in monotheism, Judaism became explicitly universal via Christianity.

I agree about Jewish monotheism but not the rest.

More trivia from Ehrman: Christianity began as a minor cult of Judaism but it soon diverged into two opposing camps centered on the question of did Christians have to first become Jews. The Christians in Israel believed so, those of the diaspora said no. It was Roman pagans that decided the issue by wiping out the Christian Jews of Jerusalem when the Jews revolted.

It was certainly trivial, since it's false. Few Christian Jews remained in Jerusalem by the time of the Revolt; they wer already scattered faer and wide, having been persecuted already, with most of them killed long before Paul was executed in Rome. The Jerusalem Jews themselves killed most of them, like his brother James and many others. The Second Jewish Revolt, the bar Kokhba revolt, finished the split and drove Christians out of the synagogues, also accompanied by massacres of Christians by Orthodox Jews and Pharisees, who made up most of the new 'Rabbis' running around. Christianity spread quickly and widely, as did most Jews who had converted.

You may be right about some of the timings since what I wrote was not just taken from Ehrman.

I think it is safe to say most Jews did not convert and became targets of Christians. Christianity grew by conversions of pagans. It was still a small minority of the Roman world until Constantine.

Erhman also has problems with timelines; it's one of the reasons he's easy to refute. And a lot of Jews did convert; there were a lot more Jews than the Jews of Jerusalem, and far more of them were alienated by the Temple Jews set up in power by Darius and the Persians; the racist Jews just never bothered to record their histories, since they were 'tainted' and of no worth, their only function to line the pockets of the 'real Jews' as determined by the 'pure' Jews. Certainly gentiels became converts, as I said Judaism became universal vis Christianity, , and they were already spread all over the Roman world before Constantine was even born. The only reason the malcontents and pagans snivel about 'Constantine' all the time is they think if they can peddle the nonsense he rewrote everything then whatever rubbish they fell like revising is valid as well, i.e. they're stupid and loony.

It is my understanding that Jews did NOT convert in large numbers. Got a link that says different?

How many Jews became Christians in the first century?

The failure of the Christian mission to the Jews1 David C Sim2 Australian Catholic University Research Associate: Department of New Testament Studies University of Pretoria​

Abstract This study examines the early Christian mission(s) to the Jews, and attempts to determine, albeit speculatively, the number of Jews in the Christian movement in the first century. It is argued that the combined Christian mission was marked by a distinct lack of success. Neither the Law-observant gospel of the Jerusalem church nor the Law-free gospel of the Hellenists and Paul made much impression upon the people of Israel. Throughout the first century the total number of Jews in the Christian movement probably never exceeded 1 000 and by the end of the century the Christian church was largely Gentile.

Rubbish. You're buying the myth that Jews only existed in Jerusalem and that only those who were the Orthodox were Jews. The Peanut Gallery can read Paul Johnson's History Of The Jews in tandem with James Carroll's criticism of the Catholic Church's antisemitism, Constantine's Sword, for good intro summaries of the conflict in that day before moving on to more detailed histories; the Jews were divided into several factions, not just Christians vs 'The' Jews, for one, and of course the ministry didn't start and end on the Temple steps, either. The Catholic conservatives never liked the idea of Jewish Christians, and neither did the Orthodox Jews who lost money and power to them; they both complimented each others' bigotry and malicious hatred of ' infidels'.

You're rewriting Christian history. I don't blame you

Like Disraeli said, Christianity is completed Judaism. Jews didn't become monotheistic until Deutro-Isaiah, and since universalism is implicit in monotheism, Judaism became explicitly universal via Christianity.

I agree about Jewish monotheism but not the rest.

More trivia from Ehrman: Christianity began as a minor cult of Judaism but it soon diverged into two opposing camps centered on the question of did Christians have to first become Jews. The Christians in Israel believed so, those of the diaspora said no. It was Roman pagans that decided the issue by wiping out the Christian Jews of Jerusalem when the Jews revolted.

It was certainly trivial, since it's false. Few Christian Jews remained in Jerusalem by the time of the Revolt; they wer already scattered faer and wide, having been persecuted already, with most of them killed long before Paul was executed in Rome. The Jerusalem Jews themselves killed most of them, like his brother James and many others. The Second Jewish Revolt, the bar Kokhba revolt, finished the split and drove Christians out of the synagogues, also accompanied by massacres of Christians by Orthodox Jews and Pharisees, who made up most of the new 'Rabbis' running around. Christianity spread quickly and widely, as did most Jews who had converted.

You may be right about some of the timings since what I wrote was not just taken from Ehrman.

I think it is safe to say most Jews did not convert and became targets of Christians. Christianity grew by conversions of pagans. It was still a small minority of the Roman world until Constantine.

Erhman also has problems with timelines; it's one of the reasons he's easy to refute. And a lot of Jews did convert; there were a lot more Jews than the Jews of Jerusalem, and far more of them were alienated by the Temple Jews set up in power by Darius and the Persians; the racist Jews just never bothered to record their histories, since they were 'tainted' and of no worth, their only function to line the pockets of the 'real Jews' as determined by the 'pure' Jews. Certainly gentiels became converts, as I said Judaism became universal vis Christianity, , and they were already spread all over the Roman world before Constantine was even born. The only reason the malcontents and pagans snivel about 'Constantine' all the time is they think if they can peddle the nonsense he rewrote everything then whatever rubbish they fell like revising is valid as well, i.e. they're stupid and loony.

It is my understanding that Jews did NOT convert in large numbers. Got a link that says different?

How many Jews became Christians in the first century?

The failure of the Christian mission to the Jews1 David C Sim2 Australian Catholic University Research Associate: Department of New Testament Studies University of Pretoria​

Abstract This study examines the early Christian mission(s) to the Jews, and attempts to determine, albeit speculatively, the number of Jews in the Christian movement in the first century. It is argued that the combined Christian mission was marked by a distinct lack of success. Neither the Law-observant gospel of the Jerusalem church nor the Law-free gospel of the Hellenists and Paul made much impression upon the people of Israel. Throughout the first century the total number of Jews in the Christian movement probably never exceeded 1 000 and by the end of the century the Christian church was largely Gentile.

Rubbish. You're buying the myth that Jews only existed in Jerusalem and that only those who were the Orthodox were Jews. The Peanut Gallery can read Paul Johnson's History Of The Jews in tandem with James Carroll's criticism of the Catholic Church's antisemitism, Constantine's Sword, for good intro summaries of the conflict in that day before moving on to more detailed histories; the Jews were divided into several factions, not just Christians vs 'The' Jews, for one, and of course the ministry didn't start and end on the Temple steps, either. The Catholic conservatives never liked the idea of Jewish Christians, and neither did the Orthodox Jews who lost money and power to them; they both complimented each others' bigotry and malicious hatred of ' infidels'.

I think you're attempting to rewrite early Christian history and I don't blame you for wanting to.

Off the top of my head: Christianity began as a Jewish cult but failed to attract many Jewish converts. Mark is aimed at Jews and makes Romans responsible for his death. Christians soon gave up and Matthew and Luke are aimed at pagan converts and shifts the blame from Rome to Jewish leaders. John is beginning to show the signs of future anti-semitism by shifting blame for Jesus' death to the Jewish people as a whole. Not a surprising trend since Christians lived in a Roman world and didn't enjoy great relations with Rome, early one. Blaming Romans for killing you messiah was very bad PR.

Christianity is the largest religious group on planet Earth.

2.2 billion Earthlings identify as Christian and you are a demented fool

 

[ESay]

the top of my head: Christianity began as a Jewish cult but failed to attract many Jewish converts. Mark is aimed at Jews and makes Romans responsible for his death. Christians soon gave up and Matthew and Luke are aimed at pagan converts and shifts the blame from Rome to Jewish leaders. John is beginning to show the signs of future anti-semitism by shifting blame for Jesus' death to the Jewish people as a whole. Not a surprising trend since Christians lived in a Roman world and didn't enjoy great relations with Rome, early one. Blaming Romans for killing you messiah was very bad PR

I have read that Matthew is the most 'Jewish' gospel and that is why there are plenty of quotations there from the OT.

John is aimed primarily on the pagans, on the people who were familiar with Greek philosophy and for whom the idea of several gods was understandable and common.

 

[esalla]

Am I criticizing anyone? Am I saying I was better? Am I suggesting it should have been done differently? No.

Your judgement is to accept genocide, pain, and suffering. That is your right.

In my judgement, those things are wrong. Is there a good reason that is the only way things can be designed to be? None that I can see. Now do you understand?

Holy shit, there you go again with your dishonest arguments.

No, I don't understand. You start with an argument you don't believe to arrive at what you do believe. Totally illogical. Doesn't make any sense at all. It's a self fulfilling prophecy that ass fucks logic and reason.

P.S. and you are still judging God. So just to be clear, you believe you know better than the creator of existence, right?

Assuming God exists (do I always have to start off with that?) and He is perfect, I certainly see lots of imperfection in this world. I'd judge He's not living up to his potential. Would creation fall apart if there were no viruses?

Your judgments don't seem to assume God is perfect. Your judgments seem to assume God is imperfect.

So is your assumption that if God is perfect (whatever that means) that what He created should be perfect too? There are a couple of ways I can approach this.

What God created is perfect for its purpose and objective which is the Catholic thought.
That with infinite wisdom and goodness God freely willed to create a world "in a state of journeying" towards its ultimate perfection. In God's plan this process of becoming involves the appearance of certain beings and the disappearance of others, the existence of the more perfect alongside the less perfect, both constructive and destructive forces of nature. With physical good there exists also physical evil as long as creation has not reached perfection. For almighty God. . ., because he is supremely good, would never allow any evil whatsoever to exist in his works if he were not so all-powerful and good as to cause good to emerge from evil itself.

Or Jewish thought that whatever imperfections which exist are imperfections of matter and consequence of free will. That whatever is formed of any matter receives the most perfect form possible in that species of matter: in each individual case the defects are in accordance with the defects of that individual matter and that these are very few and rare. Such that is cannot be said that God directly creates evil, or He has the direct intention to produce evil. That God only produces existence, and all existence is good. That the great evils which men cause to each other because of certain intentions, desires, opinions, or religious principles, originate in ignorance, which is absence of wisdom. The numerous evils to which individual persons are exposed are due to the defects existing in the persons themselves. We suffer from the evils which we, by our own free will, inflict on ourselves and ascribe them to God, who is far from being connected with them. Man himself is the author of this class of evils. The error of the ignorant goes so far as to say that God's power is insufficient, because He has given to this Universe the properties which they imagine cause these great evils.

But what struck me most about your post was your description that God is supposed to be perfect. Perfect what and what exactly does that mean to you? Because I think it is your misguided and biased perception of God which has you confused.

All my life I've been told God is real, he is loving, he is perfect, and he is watching over us. So far as I can see, none of that is true. Maybe God's not evil but he created a world filled with it. You're always saying there is a reason, what is the reason for COVID 19?

Seems to me that you blame God for the bad acts of man and imperfections of matter. Every living thing dies. It's a requirement for genesis to occur.

Tell me how it would work in your world if you were God.

The reason for Covid 19 is that it mutated. Viruses exist in nature and play a role in nature. They serve a purpose.

Funny how you want to blame God for the bad but aren't willing to give God credit for the good... which BTW dwarfs the bad. Unless of course you believe existence is bad.

I would not judge men when they die. No heaven and no hell. I would not intervene in human affairs.

I have an aquarium but I have no idea which goldfish are good and which are bad, I let them work it out for themselves. I do intervene if they get ill and ensure they have enough to eat because I like them.

LOL so if you had a murdering goldfish you would just watch it kill the other fish

Very godlike

You have any extra meth?

You mention 'murdering goldfish' and ask ME about meth?

Not sure about goldfish but if I put two Siamese fighting fish together should I be surprised they tried to kill each other? Are they bad or are they just Siamese fighting fish?

So you put meth in your goldfish tank and watch the fish eat each other and now you are trying to put me down.

Please save me some meth for next time, OK

 

[alang1216]

All my life I've been told God is real, he is loving, he is perfect, and he is watching over us. So far as I can see, none of that is true. Maybe God's not evil but he created a world filled with it. You're always saying there is a reason, what is the reason for COVID

You've never explained who explained God is real, he is loving, he is perfect, and he is watching over us. However, you say that to ding. too (w/o explanation), when he said, " Your judgments don't seem to assume God is perfect. Your judgments seem to assume God is imperfect."

I have to agree that you complain against God, blame God, and assume he is imperfect and give no explanation.

If I asked you about God would you describe him as is real, as loving, as perfect, and as watching over us?

I've been told God is perfect but His actions doesn't fit my definition of perfect. To me perfection requires no change and, IMHO, God has evolved like everything else.

What actions are you aware of God performing?

God has never spoken directly to me so I only have hearsay. I've been told He flooded the Earth and killed every living thing on it. I've been told He ordered the Israelites to destroy Canaanite cities and kill every man, woman, child, and animal living there. I believe they were allowed to keep the young girls as property. Is is just me or do other think this is less than perfect behavior?

 

[esalla]

All my life I've been told God is real, he is loving, he is perfect, and he is watching over us. So far as I can see, none of that is true. Maybe God's not evil but he created a world filled with it. You're always saying there is a reason, what is the reason for COVID

You've never explained who explained God is real, he is loving, he is perfect, and he is watching over us. However, you say that to ding. too (w/o explanation), when he said, " Your judgments don't seem to assume God is perfect. Your judgments seem to assume God is imperfect."

I have to agree that you complain against God, blame God, and assume he is imperfect and give no explanation.

If I asked you about God would you describe him as is real, as loving, as perfect, and as watching over us?

I've been told God is perfect but His actions doesn't fit my definition of perfect. To me perfection requires no change and, IMHO, God has evolved like everything else.

What actions are you aware of God performing?

God has never spoken directly to me so I only have hearsay. I've been told He flooded the Earth and killed every living thing on it. I've been told He ordered the Israelites to destroy Canaanite cities and kill every man, woman, child, and animal living there. I believe they were allowed to keep the young girls as property. Is is just me or do other think this is less than perfect behavior?

Did god keep the girls high on meth like they are in Minnesota and Shitcago

 

[ESay]

sure about goldfish but if I put two Siamese fighting fish together should I be surprised they tried to kill each other? Are they bad or are they just Siamese fighting fish

Exactly. The same about the Covid viruses. They are not good or bad. They are just viruses.

 

[alang1216]

Am I criticizing anyone? Am I saying I was better? Am I suggesting it should have been done differently? No.

Your judgement is to accept genocide, pain, and suffering. That is your right.

In my judgement, those things are wrong. Is there a good reason that is the only way things can be designed to be? None that I can see. Now do you understand?

Holy shit, there you go again with your dishonest arguments.

No, I don't understand. You start with an argument you don't believe to arrive at what you do believe. Totally illogical. Doesn't make any sense at all. It's a self fulfilling prophecy that ass fucks logic and reason.

P.S. and you are still judging God. So just to be clear, you believe you know better than the creator of existence, right?

Assuming God exists (do I always have to start off with that?) and He is perfect, I certainly see lots of imperfection in this world. I'd judge He's not living up to his potential. Would creation fall apart if there were no viruses?

Your judgments don't seem to assume God is perfect. Your judgments seem to assume God is imperfect.

So is your assumption that if God is perfect (whatever that means) that what He created should be perfect too? There are a couple of ways I can approach this.

What God created is perfect for its purpose and objective which is the Catholic thought.
That with infinite wisdom and goodness God freely willed to create a world "in a state of journeying" towards its ultimate perfection. In God's plan this process of becoming involves the appearance of certain beings and the disappearance of others, the existence of the more perfect alongside the less perfect, both constructive and destructive forces of nature. With physical good there exists also physical evil as long as creation has not reached perfection. For almighty God. . ., because he is supremely good, would never allow any evil whatsoever to exist in his works if he were not so all-powerful and good as to cause good to emerge from evil itself.

Or Jewish thought that whatever imperfections which exist are imperfections of matter and consequence of free will. That whatever is formed of any matter receives the most perfect form possible in that species of matter: in each individual case the defects are in accordance with the defects of that individual matter and that these are very few and rare. Such that is cannot be said that God directly creates evil, or He has the direct intention to produce evil. That God only produces existence, and all existence is good. That the great evils which men cause to each other because of certain intentions, desires, opinions, or religious principles, originate in ignorance, which is absence of wisdom. The numerous evils to which individual persons are exposed are due to the defects existing in the persons themselves. We suffer from the evils which we, by our own free will, inflict on ourselves and ascribe them to God, who is far from being connected with them. Man himself is the author of this class of evils. The error of the ignorant goes so far as to say that God's power is insufficient, because He has given to this Universe the properties which they imagine cause these great evils.

But what struck me most about your post was your description that God is supposed to be perfect. Perfect what and what exactly does that mean to you? Because I think it is your misguided and biased perception of God which has you confused.

All my life I've been told God is real, he is loving, he is perfect, and he is watching over us. So far as I can see, none of that is true. Maybe God's not evil but he created a world filled with it. You're always saying there is a reason, what is the reason for COVID 19?

Seems to me that you blame God for the bad acts of man and imperfections of matter. Every living thing dies. It's a requirement for genesis to occur.

Tell me how it would work in your world if you were God.

The reason for Covid 19 is that it mutated. Viruses exist in nature and play a role in nature. They serve a purpose.

Funny how you want to blame God for the bad but aren't willing to give God credit for the good... which BTW dwarfs the bad. Unless of course you believe existence is bad.

I would not judge men when they die. No heaven and no hell. I would not intervene in human affairs.

I have an aquarium but I have no idea which goldfish are good and which are bad, I let them work it out for themselves. I do intervene if they get ill and ensure they have enough to eat because I like them.

Is that it? Nothing else? Get it all out in the open.

If I had any rules for behavior I'd make sure EVERYONE knew what they were. No multiple religions saying various contradictory things.

And no viruses.

 

[esalla]

sure about goldfish but if I put two Siamese fighting fish together should I be surprised they tried to kill each other? Are they bad or are they just Siamese fighting fish

Exactly. The same about the Covid viruses. They are not good or bad. They are just viruses.

So germ warfare is not bad in your brain dead opinion

 

[ESay]

sure about goldfish but if I put two Siamese fighting fish together should I be surprised they tried to kill each other? Are they bad or are they just Siamese fighting fish

Exactly. The same about the Covid viruses. They are not good or bad. They are just viruses.

So germ warfare is not bad in your brain dead opinion

Hm, I wonder what brain one should have to compare viruses with people. A human was given the ability to think and control their actions, genius.

 

[esalla]

sure about goldfish but if I put two Siamese fighting fish together should I be surprised they tried to kill each other? Are they bad or are they just Siamese fighting fish

Exactly. The same about the Covid viruses. They are not good or bad. They are just viruses.

So germ warfare is not bad in your brain dead opinion

Hm, I wonder what brain one should have to compare viruses with people. A human was given the ability to think and control their actions, genius.

Are you seriously claiming that all humans can think?

 

[alang1216]

Like Disraeli said, Christianity is completed Judaism. Jews didn't become monotheistic until Deutro-Isaiah, and since universalism is implicit in monotheism, Judaism became explicitly universal via Christianity.

I agree about Jewish monotheism but not the rest.

More trivia from Ehrman: Christianity began as a minor cult of Judaism but it soon diverged into two opposing camps centered on the question of did Christians have to first become Jews. The Christians in Israel believed so, those of the diaspora said no. It was Roman pagans that decided the issue by wiping out the Christian Jews of Jerusalem when the Jews revolted.

It was certainly trivial, since it's false. Few Christian Jews remained in Jerusalem by the time of the Revolt; they wer already scattered faer and wide, having been persecuted already, with most of them killed long before Paul was executed in Rome. The Jerusalem Jews themselves killed most of them, like his brother James and many others. The Second Jewish Revolt, the bar Kokhba revolt, finished the split and drove Christians out of the synagogues, also accompanied by massacres of Christians by Orthodox Jews and Pharisees, who made up most of the new 'Rabbis' running around. Christianity spread quickly and widely, as did most Jews who had converted.

You may be right about some of the timings since what I wrote was not just taken from Ehrman.

I think it is safe to say most Jews did not convert and became targets of Christians. Christianity grew by conversions of pagans. It was still a small minority of the Roman world until Constantine.

Erhman also has problems with timelines; it's one of the reasons he's easy to refute. And a lot of Jews did convert; there were a lot more Jews than the Jews of Jerusalem, and far more of them were alienated by the Temple Jews set up in power by Darius and the Persians; the racist Jews just never bothered to record their histories, since they were 'tainted' and of no worth, their only function to line the pockets of the 'real Jews' as determined by the 'pure' Jews. Certainly gentiels became converts, as I said Judaism became universal vis Christianity, , and they were already spread all over the Roman world before Constantine was even born. The only reason the malcontents and pagans snivel about 'Constantine' all the time is they think if they can peddle the nonsense he rewrote everything then whatever rubbish they fell like revising is valid as well, i.e. they're stupid and loony.

It is my understanding that Jews did NOT convert in large numbers. Got a link that says different?

How many Jews became Christians in the first century?

The failure of the Christian mission to the Jews1 David C Sim2 Australian Catholic University Research Associate: Department of New Testament Studies University of Pretoria​

Abstract This study examines the early Christian mission(s) to the Jews, and attempts to determine, albeit speculatively, the number of Jews in the Christian movement in the first century. It is argued that the combined Christian mission was marked by a distinct lack of success. Neither the Law-observant gospel of the Jerusalem church nor the Law-free gospel of the Hellenists and Paul made much impression upon the people of Israel. Throughout the first century the total number of Jews in the Christian movement probably never exceeded 1 000 and by the end of the century the Christian church was largely Gentile.

Rubbish. You're buying the myth that Jews only existed in Jerusalem and that only those who were the Orthodox were Jews. The Peanut Gallery can read Paul Johnson's History Of The Jews in tandem with James Carroll's criticism of the Catholic Church's antisemitism, Constantine's Sword, for good intro summaries of the conflict in that day before moving on to more detailed histories; the Jews were divided into several factions, not just Christians vs 'The' Jews, for one, and of course the ministry didn't start and end on the Temple steps, either. The Catholic conservatives never liked the idea of Jewish Christians, and neither did the Orthodox Jews who lost money and power to them; they both complimented each others' bigotry and malicious hatred of ' infidels'.

You're rewriting Christian history. I don't blame you

Like Disraeli said, Christianity is completed Judaism. Jews didn't become monotheistic until Deutro-Isaiah, and since universalism is implicit in monotheism, Judaism became explicitly universal via Christianity.

I agree about Jewish monotheism but not the rest.

More trivia from Ehrman: Christianity began as a minor cult of Judaism but it soon diverged into two opposing camps centered on the question of did Christians have to first become Jews. The Christians in Israel believed so, those of the diaspora said no. It was Roman pagans that decided the issue by wiping out the Christian Jews of Jerusalem when the Jews revolted.

It was certainly trivial, since it's false. Few Christian Jews remained in Jerusalem by the time of the Revolt; they wer already scattered faer and wide, having been persecuted already, with most of them killed long before Paul was executed in Rome. The Jerusalem Jews themselves killed most of them, like his brother James and many others. The Second Jewish Revolt, the bar Kokhba revolt, finished the split and drove Christians out of the synagogues, also accompanied by massacres of Christians by Orthodox Jews and Pharisees, who made up most of the new 'Rabbis' running around. Christianity spread quickly and widely, as did most Jews who had converted.

You may be right about some of the timings since what I wrote was not just taken from Ehrman.

I think it is safe to say most Jews did not convert and became targets of Christians. Christianity grew by conversions of pagans. It was still a small minority of the Roman world until Constantine.

Erhman also has problems with timelines; it's one of the reasons he's easy to refute. And a lot of Jews did convert; there were a lot more Jews than the Jews of Jerusalem, and far more of them were alienated by the Temple Jews set up in power by Darius and the Persians; the racist Jews just never bothered to record their histories, since they were 'tainted' and of no worth, their only function to line the pockets of the 'real Jews' as determined by the 'pure' Jews. Certainly gentiels became converts, as I said Judaism became universal vis Christianity, , and they were already spread all over the Roman world before Constantine was even born. The only reason the malcontents and pagans snivel about 'Constantine' all the time is they think if they can peddle the nonsense he rewrote everything then whatever rubbish they fell like revising is valid as well, i.e. they're stupid and loony.

It is my understanding that Jews did NOT convert in large numbers. Got a link that says different?

How many Jews became Christians in the first century?

The failure of the Christian mission to the Jews1 David C Sim2 Australian Catholic University Research Associate: Department of New Testament Studies University of Pretoria​

Abstract This study examines the early Christian mission(s) to the Jews, and attempts to determine, albeit speculatively, the number of Jews in the Christian movement in the first century. It is argued that the combined Christian mission was marked by a distinct lack of success. Neither the Law-observant gospel of the Jerusalem church nor the Law-free gospel of the Hellenists and Paul made much impression upon the people of Israel. Throughout the first century the total number of Jews in the Christian movement probably never exceeded 1 000 and by the end of the century the Christian church was largely Gentile.

Rubbish. You're buying the myth that Jews only existed in Jerusalem and that only those who were the Orthodox were Jews. The Peanut Gallery can read Paul Johnson's History Of The Jews in tandem with James Carroll's criticism of the Catholic Church's antisemitism, Constantine's Sword, for good intro summaries of the conflict in that day before moving on to more detailed histories; the Jews were divided into several factions, not just Christians vs 'The' Jews, for one, and of course the ministry didn't start and end on the Temple steps, either. The Catholic conservatives never liked the idea of Jewish Christians, and neither did the Orthodox Jews who lost money and power to them; they both complimented each others' bigotry and malicious hatred of ' infidels'.

I think you're attempting to rewrite early Christian history and I don't blame you for wanting to.

Off the top of my head: Christianity began as a Jewish cult but failed to attract many Jewish converts. Mark is aimed at Jews and makes Romans responsible for his death. Christians soon gave up and Matthew and Luke are aimed at pagan converts and shifts the blame from Rome to Jewish leaders. John is beginning to show the signs of future anti-semitism by shifting blame for Jesus' death to the Jewish people as a whole. Not a surprising trend since Christians lived in a Roman world and didn't enjoy great relations with Rome, early one. Blaming Romans for killing you messiah was very bad PR.

Christianity is the largest religious group on planet Earth.

2.2 billion Earthlings identify as Christian and you are a demented fool

I have no idea why you think that was an appropriate response my post?

Most people on Earth are NOT Christians. I wonder how many of those that identify as Christian would be considered Christians by other Christians?

 

[ESay]

sure about goldfish but if I put two Siamese fighting fish together should I be surprised they tried to kill each other? Are they bad or are they just Siamese fighting fish

Exactly. The same about the Covid viruses. They are not good or bad. They are just viruses.

So germ warfare is not bad in your brain dead opinion

Hm, I wonder what brain one should have to compare viruses with people. A human was given the ability to think and control their actions, genius.

Are you seriously claiming that all humans can think?

Yes, except of mentally ill people.

 

[esalla]

Like Disraeli said, Christianity is completed Judaism. Jews didn't become monotheistic until Deutro-Isaiah, and since universalism is implicit in monotheism, Judaism became explicitly universal via Christianity.

I agree about Jewish monotheism but not the rest.

More trivia from Ehrman: Christianity began as a minor cult of Judaism but it soon diverged into two opposing camps centered on the question of did Christians have to first become Jews. The Christians in Israel believed so, those of the diaspora said no. It was Roman pagans that decided the issue by wiping out the Christian Jews of Jerusalem when the Jews revolted.

It was certainly trivial, since it's false. Few Christian Jews remained in Jerusalem by the time of the Revolt; they wer already scattered faer and wide, having been persecuted already, with most of them killed long before Paul was executed in Rome. The Jerusalem Jews themselves killed most of them, like his brother James and many others. The Second Jewish Revolt, the bar Kokhba revolt, finished the split and drove Christians out of the synagogues, also accompanied by massacres of Christians by Orthodox Jews and Pharisees, who made up most of the new 'Rabbis' running around. Christianity spread quickly and widely, as did most Jews who had converted.

You may be right about some of the timings since what I wrote was not just taken from Ehrman.

I think it is safe to say most Jews did not convert and became targets of Christians. Christianity grew by conversions of pagans. It was still a small minority of the Roman world until Constantine.

Erhman also has problems with timelines; it's one of the reasons he's easy to refute. And a lot of Jews did convert; there were a lot more Jews than the Jews of Jerusalem, and far more of them were alienated by the Temple Jews set up in power by Darius and the Persians; the racist Jews just never bothered to record their histories, since they were 'tainted' and of no worth, their only function to line the pockets of the 'real Jews' as determined by the 'pure' Jews. Certainly gentiels became converts, as I said Judaism became universal vis Christianity, , and they were already spread all over the Roman world before Constantine was even born. The only reason the malcontents and pagans snivel about 'Constantine' all the time is they think if they can peddle the nonsense he rewrote everything then whatever rubbish they fell like revising is valid as well, i.e. they're stupid and loony.

It is my understanding that Jews did NOT convert in large numbers. Got a link that says different?

How many Jews became Christians in the first century?

The failure of the Christian mission to the Jews1 David C Sim2 Australian Catholic University Research Associate: Department of New Testament Studies University of Pretoria​

Abstract This study examines the early Christian mission(s) to the Jews, and attempts to determine, albeit speculatively, the number of Jews in the Christian movement in the first century. It is argued that the combined Christian mission was marked by a distinct lack of success. Neither the Law-observant gospel of the Jerusalem church nor the Law-free gospel of the Hellenists and Paul made much impression upon the people of Israel. Throughout the first century the total number of Jews in the Christian movement probably never exceeded 1 000 and by the end of the century the Christian church was largely Gentile.

Rubbish. You're buying the myth that Jews only existed in Jerusalem and that only those who were the Orthodox were Jews. The Peanut Gallery can read Paul Johnson's History Of The Jews in tandem with James Carroll's criticism of the Catholic Church's antisemitism, Constantine's Sword, for good intro summaries of the conflict in that day before moving on to more detailed histories; the Jews were divided into several factions, not just Christians vs 'The' Jews, for one, and of course the ministry didn't start and end on the Temple steps, either. The Catholic conservatives never liked the idea of Jewish Christians, and neither did the Orthodox Jews who lost money and power to them; they both complimented each others' bigotry and malicious hatred of ' infidels'.

You're rewriting Christian history. I don't blame you

Like Disraeli said, Christianity is completed Judaism. Jews didn't become monotheistic until Deutro-Isaiah, and since universalism is implicit in monotheism, Judaism became explicitly universal via Christianity.

I agree about Jewish monotheism but not the rest.

More trivia from Ehrman: Christianity began as a minor cult of Judaism but it soon diverged into two opposing camps centered on the question of did Christians have to first become Jews. The Christians in Israel believed so, those of the diaspora said no. It was Roman pagans that decided the issue by wiping out the Christian Jews of Jerusalem when the Jews revolted.

It was certainly trivial, since it's false. Few Christian Jews remained in Jerusalem by the time of the Revolt; they wer already scattered faer and wide, having been persecuted already, with most of them killed long before Paul was executed in Rome. The Jerusalem Jews themselves killed most of them, like his brother James and many others. The Second Jewish Revolt, the bar Kokhba revolt, finished the split and drove Christians out of the synagogues, also accompanied by massacres of Christians by Orthodox Jews and Pharisees, who made up most of the new 'Rabbis' running around. Christianity spread quickly and widely, as did most Jews who had converted.

You may be right about some of the timings since what I wrote was not just taken from Ehrman.

I think it is safe to say most Jews did not convert and became targets of Christians. Christianity grew by conversions of pagans. It was still a small minority of the Roman world until Constantine.

Erhman also has problems with timelines; it's one of the reasons he's easy to refute. And a lot of Jews did convert; there were a lot more Jews than the Jews of Jerusalem, and far more of them were alienated by the Temple Jews set up in power by Darius and the Persians; the racist Jews just never bothered to record their histories, since they were 'tainted' and of no worth, their only function to line the pockets of the 'real Jews' as determined by the 'pure' Jews. Certainly gentiels became converts, as I said Judaism became universal vis Christianity, , and they were already spread all over the Roman world before Constantine was even born. The only reason the malcontents and pagans snivel about 'Constantine' all the time is they think if they can peddle the nonsense he rewrote everything then whatever rubbish they fell like revising is valid as well, i.e. they're stupid and loony.

It is my understanding that Jews did NOT convert in large numbers. Got a link that says different?

How many Jews became Christians in the first century?

The failure of the Christian mission to the Jews1 David C Sim2 Australian Catholic University Research Associate: Department of New Testament Studies University of Pretoria​

Abstract This study examines the early Christian mission(s) to the Jews, and attempts to determine, albeit speculatively, the number of Jews in the Christian movement in the first century. It is argued that the combined Christian mission was marked by a distinct lack of success. Neither the Law-observant gospel of the Jerusalem church nor the Law-free gospel of the Hellenists and Paul made much impression upon the people of Israel. Throughout the first century the total number of Jews in the Christian movement probably never exceeded 1 000 and by the end of the century the Christian church was largely Gentile.

Rubbish. You're buying the myth that Jews only existed in Jerusalem and that only those who were the Orthodox were Jews. The Peanut Gallery can read Paul Johnson's History Of The Jews in tandem with James Carroll's criticism of the Catholic Church's antisemitism, Constantine's Sword, for good intro summaries of the conflict in that day before moving on to more detailed histories; the Jews were divided into several factions, not just Christians vs 'The' Jews, for one, and of course the ministry didn't start and end on the Temple steps, either. The Catholic conservatives never liked the idea of Jewish Christians, and neither did the Orthodox Jews who lost money and power to them; they both complimented each others' bigotry and malicious hatred of ' infidels'.

I think you're attempting to rewrite early Christian history and I don't blame you for wanting to.

Off the top of my head: Christianity began as a Jewish cult but failed to attract many Jewish converts. Mark is aimed at Jews and makes Romans responsible for his death. Christians soon gave up and Matthew and Luke are aimed at pagan converts and shifts the blame from Rome to Jewish leaders. John is beginning to show the signs of future anti-semitism by shifting blame for Jesus' death to the Jewish people as a whole. Not a surprising trend since Christians lived in a Roman world and didn't enjoy great relations with Rome, early one. Blaming Romans for killing you messiah was very bad PR.

Christianity is the largest religious group on planet Earth.

2.2 billion Earthlings identify as Christian and you are a demented fool

I have no idea why you think that was an appropriate response my post?

Most people on Earth are NOT Christians. I wonder how many of those that identify as Christian would be considered Christians by other Christians?

Christians are the largest religious group on Earth if you deny this you are more delusional than you seem.

Really I am all out of meth, can you spare some

 

[BreezeWood]

All my life I've been told God is real, he is loving, he is perfect, and he is watching over us. So far as I can see, none of that is true. Maybe God's not evil but he created a world filled with it. You're always saying there is a reason, what is the reason for COVID

You've never explained who explained God is real, he is loving, he is perfect, and he is watching over us. However, you say that to ding. too (w/o explanation), when he said, " Your judgments don't seem to assume God is perfect. Your judgments seem to assume God is imperfect."

I have to agree that you complain against God, blame God, and assume he is imperfect and give no explanation.

If I asked you about God would you describe him as is real, as loving, as perfect, and as watching over us?

I've been told God is perfect but His actions doesn't fit my definition of perfect. To me perfection requires no change and, IMHO, God has evolved like everything else.

.

I've been told God is perfect but His (their) actions doesn't fit my definition of perfect. To me perfection requires no change and, IMHO, God has evolved like everything else.

.
their religion has evolved, perfection and purity are not the same. a perfectly, pure evil is not a distinction of the desert religions as opposed to the stated goal for the individual to accomplish in purity the proper combination for spiritual freedom and possible admission to the Everlasting.

deviants and sociopaths in the eyes of the beholder.

 

[BreezeWood]

sure about goldfish but if I put two Siamese fighting fish together should I be surprised they tried to kill each other? Are they bad or are they just Siamese fighting fish

Exactly. The same about the Covid viruses. They are not good or bad. They are just viruses.

.

Exactly. The same about the Covid viruses. They are not good or bad. They are just viruses.

.
they'll find out eventually, they are one or the other metaphysically and may not be welcome to the Everlasting but as is could very well be directed in their endeavor by mt. high against the primary evil threatening Garden Earth, humanity and be rewarded someway to become eligible afterall.

 

[alang1216]

Christians are the largest religious group on Earth if you deny this you are more delusional than you seem.

Really I am all out of meth, can you spare some

So? What is your point? Is religion some sort of a democracy or is it a relic of a violent and colonialistic past? Jews never went to war to convert others while Christians and Muslims did. Jews make up a tiny portion of the world while Christians and Muslims have huge numbers. Coincidence?

Sorry to hear about your meth shortage, hope you get some soon.