does god really get angry???

Originally posted by SwissGambit
No, I didn't.

They all could have avoided choosing evil as it were, only some did.
They either had the power to make that choice or they didn't. You
are either saying they could not make it, or they should not have given
in to evil because they were too 'enlightend'. So if they were enlighted
enough to know and did it any way! That was than a reason to judge
them for doing something wrong, that is after all what is being done
to them, because they did something wrong!
Kelly

Originally posted by SwissGambit
No, I didn't.

But you said that you would "enlighten" them enough not to reject you. How then could they then choose to reject you?

Of course I could argue that God attempted to "enlighten" Adam and Eve about sinning. After all, he said if you eat of it you shall surely die.

Originally posted by whodey
But you said that you would "enlighten" them enough not to reject you. How then could they then choose to reject you?

Of course I could argue that God attempted to "enlighten" Adam and Eve about sinning. After all, he said if you eat of it you shall surely die.

I guess his argument is saying that if you know better you will not
do something you know you shouldn't, like that is played in life all
the time.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
I guess his argument is saying that if you know better you will not
do something you know you shouldn't, like that is played in life all
the time.
Kelly

Sin is not about "knowing better", rather, it is about open rebellion for whatever reason. For example, I do not believe we are held accountable for things that we do not know to be "sinful" such as going off the deep end psychologically due to physiological reasons that are beyond our control. I suppose he is trying to say that all one need to do is "enlighten" the rebellion out of people.

Originally posted by KellyJay
That is the point I guess, what is minor and justice, you have your
views on what reality should be as if you created it and maintained
it, and God has His as if He created it and maintained it.
Kelly

It doesn't get any more major than eternal torment. Feel free to prove me wrong by naming a worse punishment.

Originally posted by KellyJay
They all could have avoided choosing evil as it were, only some did.
They either had the power to make that choice or they didn't. You
are either saying they could not make it, or they should not have given
in to evil because they were too 'enlightend'. So if they were enlighted
enough to know and did it any way! That was than a reason to judge
them fo ...[text shortened]... rong, that is after all what is being done
to them, because they did something wrong!
Kelly

This post is too hard to decipher. Please rephrase.

Edit: I think I see what you're trying to say now. You're saying that, as things are now, people are enlightened enough to be held accountable for evil. [Feel free to clarify if I have it wrong.]

My response would be to point out the abysmal failure rate of humans [100%] to avoid choosing evil. If we were truly enlightened, at least some of us ought to be able to avoid it. My standard for 'enlightened' is evidently much higher than yours.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
It doesn't get any more major than eternal torment. Feel free to prove me wrong by naming a worse punishment.

No arguements there. You see, we can agree on a few things. 😉

Originally posted by whodey
But you said that you would "enlighten" them enough not to reject you. How then could they then choose to reject you?

Of course I could argue that God attempted to "enlighten" Adam and Eve about sinning. After all, he said if you eat of it you shall surely die.

But you said that you would "enlighten" them enough not to reject you. How then could they then choose to reject you?

No, I did not say that I would enlighten them enough not to reject me. I said that they would be enlightened enough not to do evil. There is a difference.

Of course I could argue that God attempted to "enlighten" Adam and Eve about sinning. After all, he said if you eat of it you shall surely die.

And not a terribly good argument at that. Adam and Eve had never seen death. If I were God, why would I expect the threat of it to deter them?

Originally posted by SwissGambit


No, I did not say that I would enlighten them enough not to reject me. I said that they would be enlightened enough not to do evil. There is a difference.

But evil, or at least Biblically, is the rejection of what God tells us, ie., it is the rejection of him specifically or a rejection of his Word.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
And not a terribly good argument at that. Adam and Eve had never seen death. If I were God, why would I expect the threat of it to deter them?[/b]

Then are you suggesting that giving them a taste of death is the best road to take? It seems to me that he has done just that.

Originally posted by whodey
But evil, or at least Biblically, is the rejection of what God tells us, ie., it is the rejection of him specifically or a rejection of his Word.

God: "It's going to rain next Tuesday."
Human: "I don't believe you, God!"

Clearly, Human has rejected something, I, God, told him. Is that evil? Not really. It's going to rain next Tuesday whether he likes it or not. Has he hurt anyone by doubting? Nope. My ego's not so fragile that I can't handle a simple disagreement.

Originally posted by whodey
Then are you suggesting that giving them a taste of death is the best road to take? It seems to me that he has done just that.

I would suggest quite the opposite. They did nothing worthy of death. It's like killing your 2-year-old because he touched something he wasn't supposed to. They, like the 2-year-old had no way to truly understand the severe consequences of their decision. The story, when taken literally, is yet another example of the bizarro-justice found throughout the bible.

Originally posted by whodey
He said they had free will EXCEPT when it comes to rejecting their God.

No he didn't. He merely said people were smart enough to not reject, even though they could if they chose to.

You could reject paying taxes, but it'd be unwise, and you'd end up in lots of trouble. Does this mean you don't have free will Kelly?

Originally posted by scottishinnz
No he didn't. He merely said people were smart enough to not reject, even though they could if they chose to.

You could reject paying taxes, but it'd be unwise, and you'd end up in lots of trouble. Does this mean you don't have free will Kelly?

There are two possible things here you are claiming.

1. Knowledge is enough 'enlightenment' to make you NOT choose to
do evil and with that no one should choose it.

Or

2. You are saying God should have hard wired them so no one choose
to do evil, which is really just going back to the robot creation.

With 2 you will not get anyone choosing evil, of course you really
do not have free will either, but there you go.

With 1 you can have created beings not choosing evil and those that
do even though they know better. With that one group does right
the other they choose the wrong or evil path, judgment sorts it all
out.

With respect to my taxes, I pay them and there are people who do
not, and with those that do not they get what they get for their
choices. We both have free will some choose one way of paying what
they are required to pay and others choose to hold back and reject
paying what is required.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
With respect to my taxes, I pay them and there are people who do
not, and with those that do not they get what they get for their
choices. We both have free will some choose one way of paying what
they are required to pay and others choose to hold back and reject
paying what is required.
Kelly

This is exactly the crux of the argument. You know you must pay taxes, although are free not to do so. The simple fact is if you do the crime, you must do the time.

However, life is more complex than this trifle of an example. Understanding and accepting or rejecting God is more complex than accepting the existence of taxation. Why? Because tax bills are tangible, as are tax collectors. It takes no faith to believe in them. God, on the other hand, takes a huge amount of faith to believe in.

If God had done a better job, he could have assured that everyone had the necessarily mental capabilities to successfully decipher his existence, thereby reducing the number of people he must condemn to Hell. This would be quite separate from denying them free will.

You have free will to not pay tax, but hopefully the intellectual ability to realise it's not a good idea.