[What if?] Lead codices suggest that Jesus was gay

[Tani Coyote]

If God could be attributed human characteristics I'd agree with you all over the place

But he isn't. He's as inhuman as it gets. To err is human, is in my book a very true statement. It's how we learn. It's how we grow understanding.

Seeing God just as a father figure stripped away from his absolute powers (which might be your take) does indeed invalidate my statement.

I imagine God could have absolute powers, but if one views your own personal morals as an erorr, than he is indeed not 100% free from it. He likely has conflicting reasoning/morals, explaining many of his issues.

He can end suffering in an instant(even if the argument can be made suffering on Earth is a grain of sand compared to the divine beach), but doesn't for some reason or another. The exact reason I do not know; some say it invalidates free will. Some say it fosters dependence when he wants us to be strong and come to our conclusions.

One can say he even likes us being able to question him and thus doesn't intervene simply because that'd turn everyone into believers. Which defeats the purpose of free will if we still end up doing everything he says, doesn't it? His love for man clashes with his desire to keep free will relevant. It actually explains a lot.

While God is inhuman, he is sentient. One can say that not all humans, but all sentient things(assuming there are other intelligent races out there, which I consider very possible), were crafted in his "image." Of course, the inside joke is he has no image since he's evolved beyond one; he appears however we view him I imagine. Each race will view him with different looks and maybe even a different personality, but he is still the same God.

Huh? You either weren't responding to that part, or something... I said the Catholics believe Clergy can't get married. I don't believe that they can't get married, since I'm not Catholic...

I reasoned that the single people were probably the clergy, so I was curious why God would create people doomed to be single for any other reason.

So Hitler is in Heaven?

If he repented, yes.

Some say "I don't want to be in Heaven with Hitler." That's just it though. The inability to forgive wouldn't be compatible with going to Heaven, so in a twist of irony, that person wouldn't be allowed in until they decided to forgive.

Which shouldn't be hard when you have the most powerful being in the universe looming over you.

Hitler admits his acts were evil, begs for forgiveness, and God forgives him as he can tell a genuine change. Likewise, people who knew of Hitler are asked to forgive, and by doing so, they too are granted entry.

Anybody who genuinely changes enters. Anybody who doesn't is held somewhere else. Probably not as horrid as the Hell described by others.

No seriously, I agree with you. But believing different politics is different from sin.

But in terms of God, believing in Vishnu instead of him is different politics; you're not following his ideas. But he loves you just the same and naturally forgives you for it if you can understand you were wrong.

I don't believe repenting is limited to Earth, as you can see.

Not necessarily. First of all, I don't think you (Or anyone else) will be damned for being in a gay relationship, just like I don't think someone who has sex outside of marriage with be damned for that. At least, not in the way you are thinking. We are ALL sinners, and so deserve separation from God in Hell. But Christ died for our sins so that we can have Eternal Life. IF you put your trust in Christ, but still fell into sin after that, you would not lose your Salvation. Once you are Saved, you cannot "Be snatched out of his hand."

That's just it though. I don't believe in Jesus so I'm doomed either way. Why bother being a good person if God will still cast me out just the same?

It's why I feel God would believe in many roads rather than one. There is no "casting out" unless you are so horrid you can't change on this world or the next.

Of course. But true happiness is supposed to be found in Christ, not in worldly things (This is so my parents answer...)

But love is not worldly.

Or is God's very substance worldly now?

No, of course not. That piece of him inside everybody manifests itself as our ability to feel, and love is the purest manifestation.

Well, it seems to me it would be a way of thinking of women as sex objects of sorts...

That ignores everything you can be attracted to besides men or women though. I don't think people even think of it in terms of attraction though; pleasure is the purpose of it.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I imagine God could have absolute powers, but if one views your own personal morals as an erorr, than he is indeed not 100% free from it. He likely has conflicting reasoning/morals, explaining many of his issues.

He can end suffering in an instant(even if the argument can be made suffering on Earth is a grain of sand compared to the divine beach), but doesn't for some reason or another. The exact reason I do not know; some say it invalidates free will. Some say it fosters dependence when he wants us to be strong and come to our conclusions.

One can say he even likes us being able to question him and thus doesn't intervene simply because that'd turn everyone into believers. Which defeats the purpose of free will if we still end up doing everything he says, doesn't it? His love for man clashes with his desire to keep free will relevant. It actually explains a lot.

While God is inhuman, he is sentient. One can say that not all humans, but all sentient things(assuming there are other intelligent races out there, which I consider very possible), were crafted in his "image." Of course, the inside joke is he has no image since he's evolved beyond one; he appears however we view him I imagine. Each race will view him with different looks and maybe even a different personality, but he is still the same God.

First off, when I said err, I meant it as in making mistakes. Does God make mistakes?

Second, ascribing the all-powerfull ability to him opens the way to all kinds of paradoxes. And brings me back to my original thought: "what could God get out of a relationship with humans". In other words, what do you give a guy who's got everything.

It still seems very much to me you are decribing a very powerful entity who also has it's shortcommings. Much less so than ours of course, since it would have such a vast amount of understanding to work with.

And even the concept of "free will" is foggy when there are consequences to not being a believer. Or when we're at least not oblivious to the consequences. If you behave you get a cookie. Is that free will? Or did I just influence that? If it's just noted so to speak then there's no conflict. The moment you make the distinction "those who believe will ... and those who don't ..." and you let this shine through to us in whatever way people make these claims about knowing what God want or does not want, then you've comprimised the concept of pure free will. It's not a binary thing, there are always choices, but it seems to me that people always talk about this concept as an absolute.

 

[.Shane.]

Whenever I look at this thread, I keep reading it as

"Lead codpieces suggest that Jesus was gay"

 

[civ_king]

Domination, I'd like to point out that no Churches which can validly claim apostolic succession allow priest to marry.

 

[Tani Coyote]

First off, when I said err, I meant it as in making mistakes. Does God make mistakes?

If we consider unable to choose between two options as a mistake, possibly so. He wants everyone to be happy but at the same time he doesn't want everyone to latch onto him as that defeats the whole purpose of everyone being free.

Second, ascribing the all-powerfull ability to him opens the way to all kinds of paradoxes. And brings me back to my original thought: "what could God get out of a relationship with humans". In other words, what do you give a guy who's got everything.

Well, I suppose you can ask this to a parent and get a good answer. All the power in the world is useless without someone who you love to share it with. This mentality may seem human, but who is to say it doesn't derive from God? If we are indeed made in his image, than much of what we consider "human" could actually have come from him.

Or when we're at least not oblivious to the consequences. If you behave you get a cookie. Is that free will? Or did I just influence that? If it's just noted so to speak then there's no conflict. The moment you make the distinction "those who believe will ... and those who don't ..."

As for basis of belief, I don't think God cares. He cares moreso for our actions and how we treat eachother. While this opens the gates of sin and punishment, we must remember there's an eternity to see the error of our ways. But we can always CHOOSE to not see it... though the incentives of good are so great only a fool chooses evil in the span of infinity.

and you let this shine through to us in whatever way people make these claims about knowing what God want or does not want, then you've comprimised the concept of pure free will. It's not a binary thing, there are always choices, but it seems to me that people always talk about this concept as an absolute.

Pure free will, meaning free from pressure, probably doesn't exist in the event of a God's existence. He'd probably incentivise good behavior, even if he doesn't truly punish bad behavior. It somewhat distorts the choice, but one does still retain the choice. Even if one is more painful than the others.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Well, I suppose you can ask this to a parent and get a good answer. All the power in the world is useless without someone who you love to share it with. This mentality may seem human, but who is to say it doesn't derive from God?

Who is to say it does?

It is logical though to indeed attribute human motivators to it, since these are the only ones which we are familliar with.

If we are indeed made in his image, than much of what we consider "human" could actually have come from him.

Much what we consider human is based upon our short commings.

As for basis of belief, I don't think God cares. He cares moreso for our actions and how we treat eachother.

Again, why? (I know it's not an answerable question, so I am in fact being deliberately obtuse, but to love an entity which is not describably in a lot of key areas, is to me a leap of faith that puzzles me.

Why should I love God? What reason is there for me to love God? None. Not one. Except .... the promise of heaven, the threat of hell. Love me and I'll be good to you, don't and I'll punish you for eternity. This is supposed to be a righteous God? This is supposed to be a God who imbedded reason in me and gave me the option of not buying into this conditional love. I'd be less than what I am if I would lay my life in service of this authoritarian entity.

The Gospel accoording to Ziggy.
God gave us reason and morality so we could reject it and it's conditional love to make it clear to it we are capable of making the moraly just decisions which make a human good against the looming threat of an eternal punishment.

Only those who do not give into God's demand for love will be saved.

In the afterlife, God will welcome me with open arms for being true to myself and my fellow human beings. Those who fell into his trap will also be there, but they've learned the lesson about love and free will and therefore have the same understanding.

While this opens the gates of sin and punishment, we must remember there's an eternity to see the error of our ways. But we can always CHOOSE to not see it... though the incentives of good are so great only a fool chooses evil in the span of infinity.

Is doing good because you enjoy doing good not a nobler sentiment? You'll feel good about yourself, so there are selfish motivations, but you are also happy to have done good out of an evolutionary drive. Doing good because you'll get your ass burned 24/7/infinity or be blissful for eternity as a reward, isn't that purely out of selfish motivations?

No thanks, I don't need a reward for doing good besides helping the species I live in. It's the home team, what can I say, I'm biased towards them.

Pure free will, meaning free from pressure, probably doesn't exist in the event of a God's existence. He'd probably incentivise good behavior, even if he doesn't truly punish bad behavior. It somewhat distorts the choice, but one does still retain the choice. Even if one is more painful than the others.

In what way does God incentivise good behaviour (apart from the eternal afterlife)? In what way does God manifest itself at all to motivate anything?

edit: crap, turned into a bit of a quotefest, sorry

 

[Leoreth]

Domination, I'd like to point out that no Churches which can validly claim apostolic succession allow priest to marry.

Well, except the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[El_Machinae]

Ziggy, your Gospel sounds like a variant of the Milgram Test.

measured the willingness of study participants to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts that conflicted with their personal conscience

 

[Formaldehyde]

I don't think double jeopardy really applies to how hate crimes legislation works either. There are instances where double jeopardy could apply, for example --

1. The government attempts to convict a man for murder and fails.
2. District attorney then decides to try to convict a man for a hate crime regarding the same act. That would be double jeopardy, the government would be harassing an individual over a same or similar accusation.

No it isn't, at least in the case where local government brings the initial charges and the federal government brings the hate crime charges afterwards.

2 convicted in Pa. hate-crime beating death

Related OT thread.

Besides collecting statistics, that is the intent of federal hate crime laws. They provide a safety net in situations such as this where the local authorities either intentionally or incompetently drop the ball.

State hate crime laws have a different purpose. They exist to impose additional sentences against particularly heinous hate crimes.

If that offends bigots, good.

Indeed.

 

[GhostWriter16]

If he repented, yes.

Some say "I don't want to be in Heaven with Hitler." That's just it though. The inability to forgive wouldn't be compatible with going to Heaven, so in a twist of irony, that person wouldn't be allowed in until they decided to forgive.

Which shouldn't be hard when you have the most powerful being in the universe looming over you.

Hitler admits his acts were evil, begs for forgiveness, and God forgives him as he can tell a genuine change. Likewise, people who knew of Hitler are asked to forgive, and by doing so, they too are granted entry.

Anybody who genuinely changes enters. Anybody who doesn't is held somewhere else. Probably not as horrid as the Hell described by others.

I actually agree, sort of, with what you are saying here. If Hitler did repent, in this life, yes I believe he would go to Heaven.

That said, I believe a perfect person would not hold grudges, because they would realize we ALL deserve Hell for having ever been sinful.

However, with the way you are describing Heaven, somehow this doesn't seem right to me. The way you seem to be describing Heaven, we won't necessarily be perfect, we can still hold grudges if we want too, and doing so will apparently not allow us into Heaven. You ALSO seem to accept some sort of works-based Salvation (I don't totally understand what you believe) or at least that good works gain us merit. If so, why should Hitler, who killed 6 million people, be allowed into Heaven, but those he tortured could be denied entry on the grounds that they couldn't forgive him? Sounds a little ridiculous IMO.

That's just it though. I don't believe in Jesus so I'm doomed either way. Why bother being a good person if God will still cast me out just the same?

Its not about being a good person. We are all sinners, evil in God's sight. Only a perfect sacrifice to cover our sin and pay for it is enough to get us into Heaven, and only if we trust in it.

Your only hope is if you place your trust in Jesus Christ sometime before death, not in good works.

Domination, I'd like to point out that no Churches which can validly claim apostolic succession allow priest to marry.

I'd like to point out that there is nothing in Scripture prohibiting priests from marrying, or indeed talking about priests at all. The Aaronic Priesthood, of Levitical Priests, are FAR inferior to the Melchizedek priesthood, which includes all believers, as is clear from Scripture. Are we ALL called to celibacy?

 

[civ_king]

Well, except the Roman Catholic Church.

The Roman Catholic Church does not allow priests to marry

I actually agree, sort of, with what you are saying here. If Hitler did repent, in this life, yes I believe he would go to Heaven.
*snip*
I'd like to point out that there is nothing in Scripture prohibiting priests from marrying, or indeed talking about priests at all. The Aaronic Priesthood, of Levitical Priests, are FAR inferior to the Melchizedek priesthood, which includes all believers, as is clear from Scripture. Are we ALL called to celibacy?

The proper solution is to have purgatory which Hitler would be in until Judgement day

Look, the Churches that can trace their roots to the Apostles do not allow priests to marry, this has been in place since the start. Can you find an example of a priest legitimately marrying in either the Catholic Church or an Orthodox Church?

Melchizedek priesthood? When did you start adopting Mormon theology? Source in the Bible please.

 

[GhostWriter16]

The proper solution is to have purgatory which Hitler would be in until Judgement day

I confess this is a good thought. Then he would have a chance if he repented, but only after suffering what he made others suffer. I am intrigued.

Only one problem, its fantasyland, you have no evidence.

Melchizedek priesthood? When did you start adopting Mormon theology? Source in the Bible please.

And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham: But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises" (Hebrews 7:5-6).

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law" (Hebrews 7:11-12).

 

[civ_king]

I confess this is a good thought. Then he would have a chance if he repented, but only after suffering what he made others suffer. I am intrigued.

Only one problem, its fantasyland, you have no evidence.

I've already provided Scriptural evidence of purgatory to you several time.

I don't see how that supports a priesthood of all believers.

 

[GhostWriter16]

I've already provided Scriptural evidence of purgatory to you several time.

No you haven't. Apocrypha doesn't count, unless you can prove it as valid Scripture, which even if you could, there's got to be something in the canonical 66 books.

I don't see how that supports a priesthood of all believers.

I'll get back to you on that (Its late, I have school tomorrow, I don't feel like spending 2 hours researching tonight...)

 

[JollyRoger]

So it's got be in the canonical 66 books, except when it is and we are told that no longer applies. Got it.

 

[Berzerker]

it shouldn't matter if he was gay, or straight, or bi, male or female or a hermaphrodite, black or white or some shade of brown in between, Jew or gentile. The message does not depend on the messenger...

 

[GhostWriter16]

So it's got be in the canonical 66 books, except when it is and we are told that no longer applies. Got it.

If indeed Civ_King could find Purgatory in the canonical 66 books, I would have to believe it. A fact doesn't "No longer apply" although sometimes a law does.

Think of it this way, if there's a speed limit of 15 in a school zone, it only applies during school hours. In Non-school hours it doesn't apply. Does that mean the speed limit law was bad? No! But it was for a specific place and time.

On the other hand, the Purgatory thing would be more like saying someone went to jail for driving 60 through said 15 MPH zone. That is simply a fact, it doesn't "Change with the times."

 

[JollyRoger]

On the other hand, the Purgatory thing would be more like saying someone went to jail for driving 60 through said 15 MPH zone. That is simply a fact, it doesn't "Change with the times."

So someone that drives 60 through a school zone can go to heaven or hell, but not purgatory?

 

[GamezRule]

People can go to jail for driving 60 in a 15.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

I've yet to see anything even in the apocrypha that supports the concept of Purgatory. All the famous verse from II Maccabees supports is praying for the dead. From the context it seems far more reasonable to assume it points to a belief in the Bodily Resurrection of the Dead and in Last Judgement rather than Particular Judgement and the continued conscious existence of disembodied souls.