Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, but three individuals, according to scripture, are addressed by that title.
[...]
Isn't Ba'al (meaning "Lord") also addressed as a god? What was the title "God" that you think three individuals were addressed as? El? Theos? Yahweh?
"Something had gone terribly wrong in Psalm 82. The supernatural beings He had appointed to rule the nations justly had failed to perform. They were supposed to rule with justice, executing judgments on behalf of the poor, the widows and the rest of the nations. But because they did not judge properly, Yahweh would judge them. And the punishment was ferocious.
[Yahweh] has taken his place in the divine council,
In the midst of the gods he passes judgment. . . .
And all of you, sons of Elyon [God Most High]
Instead like Adam you shall die,
And like one of the ‘Shining Ones’ you shall fall.”
“Arise, O Yahweh; Judge the earth!
May you take possession of all the nations!”
God's really not as paranoid about our potential as people seem to think He is.
People take that idea from Genesis, which portrays the (supposedly "Meaningless because Uncreated") Jealous Power as scared of men's hands and man's unity and man's possibility.
Again, perhaps in the definition of God in the Christian doctrine, God can have off springs - perhaps a Hindu God can also have off springs * but * in the Islamic doctrine, the core belief in the definition of an Islamic God is, "He neither begets nor is born". 112:3
So yes, Christians and other faiths may believe that God can have off springs - which is good for them and I don't have a problem with it.
In the Islamic faith, for something to become a God, it HAS to be neither begotten nor it must beget.
So we are not here in a hosing down contest. We are simply stating the description of God as per our own faiths.
If He [chooses to] neither begets nor is born, than how is It male? Does He have testosterone? Does he have the SRY gene?
If you created humans without "begetting them" would you then be their slave-owner and they would have no rights before you?
The answer is clear: it takes TWO to decide what's fair.
...that is, unless Might Makes Right. And right/goodness is not real, but merely dictational.
All you have to do is look at the foolish and idiotic things that man does, and it's clear that we would never make good "gods". If we had more powers than we have, we would have already wiped ourselves out. The planet would be devoid of humans, and probably all other living creatures as well. Only man could up with such a horrible idea and concept as that
Last edited by Thoreau424; 10-04-2017 at 09:16 AM..
Let's just assume for a moment that you are one of the one's that is allowed to replace your biological components with artificial components as we approach technological singularity.
If you understand that AI will essentially be a decentralized web, you'd realize that even if it is possible to continue living artificially, you would not have complete control. Your creator, AI, would ultimately be in control.
Imagine that, you get to live forever, but trapped in hell because you will no longer be in control of your functions. You will be utilized for whatever the main AI processor decides.
All you have to do is look at the foolish and idiotic things that man does, and it's clear that we would never make good "gods". If we had more powers than we have, we would have already wiped ourselves out. The planet would be devoid of humans, and probably all other living creatures as well. Only man could up with such a horrible idea and concept as that
Oh, I don't know. Where we are now and where we could ultimately end up are two different things. Look at what God says in Genesis, just before casting Adam and Eve out of the garden: "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil."Godhood requires a knowledge of both good and evil (among a myriad of other things, of course). But presumably by eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, Adam and Eve had taken the first step to becoming what they might ultimately become. Without a knowledge of good and evil, not much else of value can follow.
Well, yeah. You're Mormon, and Mormon's teach that they can become gods. So, I expected a response from you. The whole Mormon notion of populating the universe with spirit children and all that stuff. I know about Moroni and company.
Despite the warning at the end of the Bible about "adding to" what is written in scripture, the book of mormon has all kinds a ideas emanating from Joseph Smith in the 19th century that are to be somehow tacked on to the end of scripture. Good try, but no.
P.S. You can't use the beginning of the Bible, and the beginning of it all, to explain where we are now. So much happened and changed from the time of Adam and Eve, to Jesus. We can't live and think as though we're still in the Garden of Eden, and before the fall. It's 2017, by the way.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
