stiggy wiggy
Well-known member
They back the claim with their documented, empirical evidence.
No they didn't.
This is a lie.
Obviously not. Why else would you continue to blabber against watching over people who suffer?
They back the claim with their documented, empirical evidence.
This is a lie.
OK.No they didn't.
Because you keep lying and saying I turn my back.Obviously not. Why else would you continue to blabber against watching over people who suffer?
Because you keep lying and saying I turn my back.
Because I do not consider suffering to be a spectator sport. I think people should help the sufferi8ng.Then why do you think no one should WATCH suffering?
Because I do not consider suffering to be a spectator sport. I think people should help the sufferi8ng.
This has descended into the absurd. If you think I am arguing that watching things is wrong and we should all cover our eyes then you are either incapable of listening or are intentionally lying about my position because its easier to argue.Idiotic. How can you help someone suffering if you can't WATCH to find out what the suffering entails?
On Carm? Incredible, It's absolutely shocking!!This has descended into the absurd.
This has descended into the absurd. If you think I am arguing that watching things .....
This has descended into the absurd. If you think I am arguing that watching things is wrong .......
With humanity opinion tends to be divided on that.Humanity
There may be some disagreement as to what constitutes 'conscious' and 'purposeful' and 'needless' and 'harm' - and there certainly are those who add onto this standard of basic human decency, but make no mistake about it - EVERY human being on earth {minus the true socio/psychopath} wholeheartedly agrees that it is immoral to consciously and purposefully inflict needless harm upon others!With humanity opinion tends to be divided on that.
Then as I said humanity is divided on that.There may be some disagreement as to what constitutes 'conscious' and 'purposeful' and 'needless' and 'harm' - and there certainly are those who add onto this standard of basic human decency, but make no mistake about it - EVERY human being on earth {minus the true socio/psychopath} wholeheartedly agrees that it is immoral to consciously and purposefully inflict needless harm upon others!
I criticize God for watching people suffer when he could help them. Itys not the watching. It is the lack of helping. I find it very hard to believe that you did not understand this - seems like you are just deflecting.You obviously ARE. More than half of your tiresome posts are criticizing the God in Whom you don't believe for WATCHING people suffer.
Can you explain why God does nothing to feed the thousands of children who are slowly starving to death?
This is nonsensical. And 'maybe' is not an argument - its just guessing.Maybe He's waiting on you. But you do nothing. You don't even WATCH.
This is nonsensical. And 'maybe' is not an argument - its just guessing.
And watching has no elegance.
They knew that disobeying God would lead to their deaths.They did not, however, know that to disobey God is evil - any more than they could have known that to obey God is good
That is an opinion that is not supported by the narrative.Like I said, they were as toddlers
Eve must have had some concept of it or else the thought of being like God knowing good and bad would have been meaningless to her. That she could come to know good and bad like God was the crux of the serpents argument. If she did not have some idea of the concepts of good and bad, then that would have been in her response to the serpent.Being respectful is good
However, Adam and Eve had no concept of good
We have already covered this point: it is not immoral to inflict suffering on another for a worthy purpose.And this is immoral
It is immoral to inflict suffering upon the entire human race because the 1st two people were 'disrespectful'
So if the "god of this world" aka, Satan, can blind men from seeing the good news of salvation, then he can also subject the world to vanity. The true God and Father is the one who shall set creation free from corruption. Therefore, the better meaning of Romans 8 is below.
The wicked, from satan on down to his lowliest minion cannot do a wicked thing except that God has allowed them to exist. And God allows the wicked to exist for his purposes."To vanity was the creation made subject--not of its will, but because of him [Satan?] who did subject [it]. In hope, that also the creation itself shall be set free from the servitude of the corruption to the liberty of the glory of the children of God [El]." Romans 8:18.
Wanting to know something that one does not already know is NOT the same thing as knowing that somethingEve must have had some concept of it or else the thought of being like God knowing good and bad would have been meaningless to her. That she could come to know good and bad like God was the crux of the serpents argument. If she did not have some idea of the concepts of good and bad, then that would have been in her response to the serpent.
john