Atheist vs. Theist
What does in God’s image mean? He created Adam & Eve without a moral sense.
Submitted by Greatest I am on March 31, 2012 - 4:02pm.What does in God’s image mean? He created Adam & Eve without a moral sense.
I take, in God’s image, to refer to God’s and our mental image and not the physical. God does not look like us in any way. He and his form is quite alien to us.
Genesis shows that Adam & Eve were created without the moral sense that would make them like Gods. That being the case, they had to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil to be in God’s mental image. That is without a doubt a requirement to the development of a moral sense and is confirmed by God after Adam and Eve disobeyed his command to stay dumb and without a moral sense.
If they were created in God’s image then they would have already had the moral sense that comes from the knowledge of good and evil and would therefore not have been tempted by Satan to eat of the tree of knowledge because they would have had that knowledge already. This would also mean that God was punishing them unjustly.
One must conclude from these biblical facts, that God did not make mankind in his image.
The only other logical alternative is that God does not have a moral sense and that he too, like Adam and Eve, was basically as dumb as a cow.
What does in God’s image mean? He created Adam & Eve without a moral sense.
Submitted by Greatest I am on March 31, 2012 - 4:00pm.What does in God’s image mean? He created Adam & Eve without a moral sense.
I take, in God’s image, to refer to God’s and our mental image and not the physical. God does not look like us in any way. He and his form is quite alien to us.
Genesis shows that Adam & Eve were created without the moral sense that would make them like Gods. That being the case, they had to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil to be in God’s mental image. That is without a doubt a requirement to the development of a moral sense and is confirmed by God after Adam and Eve disobeyed his command to stay dumb and without a moral sense.
If they were created in God’s image then they would have already had the moral sense that comes from the knowledge of good and evil and would therefore not have been tempted by Satan to eat of the tree of knowledge because they would have had that knowledge already. This would also mean that God was punishing them unjustly.
One must conclude from these biblical facts, that God did not make mankind in his image.
The only other logical alternative is that God does not have a moral sense and that he too, like Adam and Eve, was basically as dumb as a cow.
If God/Jesus does not know sex and reproduction, he is not fit to dictate it’s laws.
Submitted by Greatest I am on March 31, 2012 - 9:25am.If God/Jesus does not know sex and reproduction, he is not fit to dictate it’s laws.
If God/Jesus, does not know of man’s sexuality, then he has no right or just claim to dictate our sexual conduct. He does not have the skill set or knowledge required to judge. No carnal desires, no wife, no pure born children, no chemical reaction in his brain, or sexual desire for a wife without reproduction being the reason.
God/Jesus’ only opportunity to learn of man’s sexuality is through Mary, his mother. If God does know of our sexuality then it can only be through incest. There is also the issue of bestiality. Jesus and God are not of our species.
God cannot know of the desires that men and women have in terms of sex. He cannot know the forces at work. These forces are mostly all chemical and physical. That means that God cannot know what penalties to assign to the various desires that are acted upon by man’s instincts. God would not know if those instincts can be denied or not or when a normal healthy desire crosses the line to insanity.
Should man’s sexual laws be dictated by a Jesus/God who cannot know what sex for humans is all about?
Regards
DL
Test your Knowledge of the Story Telling - A Quiz
Submitted by pauljohntheskeptic on March 27, 2012 - 2:25pm.I used to hand this to the Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, 7th Day Adventists, and any of the Evangelicals who rang my doorbell in Orlando.
The best score they ever had was 80% of those that bothered to take it.
See how you do. I'll give the answers later on.
Thoughts? Especially from creationists
Submitted by badlad83 on March 25, 2012 - 5:21pm.- Login to post comments
Until 1924 Science thought the Milky Way Galaxy WAS THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE!
Submitted by radioboyintj on March 24, 2012 - 11:23pm.Until Edwin Hubble came along in 1924 it was the opinion of scientists that the milky way contained the entirety of the Universe.
This is significant because prior than that especially in past centuries with the exception of the great scientists such as Isaac Newton and Copernicus
The Church was uneducated in the way God's universe actually was structured. This is why the sun centered Solar system was opposed by the church
Back in the 16th Century.
But just because the official church opposed Science
This does not mean that the official church was correct
Nor does it mean that the enlightenment of Science
can be used to prove there is no God.
Another Revolution came along in 1924 when Edwin Hubble discovered that the Andomeda Galaxy was not part of our own,
Discovered the Expanding Universe, Red Shift, and this is how Big Bang Cosmological thought was developed.
http://www.wired.com/thisdayintech/2009/12/1230hubble-first-galaxy-outside-milky-way/
Should I engage in a debate on Facebook about the existence of God?
Submitted by Zeeboe on March 24, 2012 - 3:42pm.Virtually everyone in my family is on my Facebook and they are Christian and they know I am not a believer. A lot of my friends on there are also Christian and many of them post Christian-related things. I say nothing. Mainly because I have most of their updates blocked since I feel that overpost too much. And also - Given that I sometimes post quotes from people like Charles Darwin and Richard Dawkins, and make little references every now and then to evolution, I don't feel sour about anything.
However, today a friend posted this -
Bad Science Atheists Accuse Christians of Believing
Submitted by radioboyintj on March 23, 2012 - 2:43am.1.
All Christians are creations inherently but not all Christians are young-earth creationists.
In fact the smart ones aren't.
We believe in the Big Bang and Expansion of the Universe just like you do.
In fact I myself roll my eyes whenever I listen to some nutjob Christian who doesn't know anything about science spout
That the earth and even the universe is only 6,000 years old.
Not only is it very bad science, and would actually make God out to be a liar, since at the distances measured by science,
starlight would then therefore have to travel faster than light in order to reach us in the created timeframe.
In other words, imagine that the universe is as large and as vast as it is. OK
Now imagine that at the size the universe is, is a quasar 5 billion light years away in distance.
Well it can't possibly be both 5 billion light years away in distance AND SIMULTANEOUSLY only 6,000 Years Old.
Since Physics does not operate that way, Young Earth Creationism must be wrong because it makes God Out to be a liar.
Because of the vast distance the light from such a distance would have to go faster than the speed of light to traverse the universe and that's impossible
Does not compute
Hello Everyone! Scientifically Minded Rational Logical Knowledge Loving Born Again Christian Here.....Big Bang, Science etc God
Submitted by radioboyintj on March 23, 2012 - 2:14am.Hey any atheists up for a fight?
send me a message i think i can take ya
i got science on my side
Ehrman says: "Yes, the historical Jesus of Nazareth did exist
Submitted by Jimenezj on March 16, 2012 - 10:55am.Ehrman says: "Yes, the historical Jesus of Nazareth did exist.
Why did he say this?
