Originally posted by jerejerebinks
However, I am saying that the devil can make you put things, such as your mind and logic, before God. Remember he is the Lord of Lies.

Now this is the dumbest reason to ignore logic that I have ever heard.

As I have said a million times....Faith demands one sugjugate logic. Now we are being told that the devil can make us use logic to sin.

And religious people will tell you what logic to believe and what logic to not believe. If it fits in with their belief system it is OK to and if it doesn't then it is not OK.

Slick and convienient

Originally posted by Vilepagan
Sure...your assertion is false, utterly without merit, and absurd in the extreme. The commandment says that you should have no other "gods" before God, not that you should put everything else in your life second to God.


My assertion is utterly without merit and absurd?

Give me a break Pagan.

The Bible clearly states that you cannot serve two masters. (i.e. Money, idols, yourself, etc etc.) It does not say you shouldnt, it says you cant.

So therefore, if you think your supreme logic is greater than God, you my friend are absurd.

Originally posted by Blibblob
Remember he is the Lord of Lies.
Lies? When has Satan lied in the bible? The priest at the church I go to always said Satan tempts you with immoral truth.

Jesus said, "You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand for the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it" (John 8:44).

Originally posted by Echo2
Now this is the dumbest reason to ignore logic that I have ever heard.

I am not saying to ignore Logic....I am saying that the devil can take your logic mix it with a dose of ignorance...and then you have, lack of faith.

As I have said a million times....Faith demands one sugjugate logic. Now we are being told that the devil can make us use logic to sin.

Yep, thats right.

And religious people will tell you what logic to believe and what logic to not believe. If it fits in with their belief system it is OK to and if it doesn't then it is not OK.

If it fits the word of God.

Keep in mind. One of the devil's better tricks is to use blind faith. He can use that faith to impersonate god, and have the zealots do his bidding. Sleeper agents if you will.

Not that I doubt it, but what gave you that information, that the devil impersonates God?

Don't really know. Just picked it up somewhere. Thats how i know a lot of stuff. But even so, think about it, it would be an excelent tactic for Satan to use. What better weapon to wage war with than your enemy himself?

Yeah....but would you educate people about yourself as the bible does about Satan?

Satan exists only in the minds of men who believe he does.

Originally posted by jerejerebinks
The Bible clearly states that you cannot serve two masters. (i.e. Money, idols, yourself, etc etc.) It does not say you shouldnt, it says you cant.

So therefore, if you think your supreme logic is greater than God, you my friend are absurd.
:thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs:

Originally posted by jerejerebinks
My assertion is utterly without merit and absurd?

Give me a break Pagan.

The Bible clearly states that you cannot serve two masters. (i.e. Money, idols, yourself, etc etc.) It does not say you shouldnt, it says you cant.

So therefore, if you think your supreme logic is greater than God, you my friend are absurd.

The Bible states many things jere...some good, some not so good...I'm glad that people like Pasteur, Gallileo, Einstein, and Lister didn't think it was the end all, and be all, of human knowledge.

Originally posted by creetwins
Satan exists only in the minds of men who believe he does.

Couln't the same be said for God?

I have a question here that's quite outside of the topic.

According to the bible, is the devil a universal neccessity or an inconvenience to god? Is there any inconvenience, or undesirable condition, that god can not remove?

Another question.

Does god have a duty, responsibility, or purpose? If so, to what/whom does god owe such?

Couln't the same be said for God?


Sure it could.



And Santa Claus too. ;)

Originally posted by Evil Homer
Couln't the same be said for God?

Only by ignorant people.

Originally posted by UnCoolDuck
Only by ignorant people.
Then teach us, oh omniscient one...

Originally posted by creetwins
Sure it could.



And Santa Claus too. ;)

But not leprachauns. "Everyone knows they went extinct years ago." -Kent Brockman

Originally posted by BorgHunter
Then teach us, oh omniscient one...

Gee, Borg, I really appreciate the compliment. However, in the interest of full disclosure, I must reveal that I am no more than a mere human just like everyone else in here. But I do thank you for your support.;)

Originally posted by Vilepagan
The Bible states many things jere...some good, some not so good...I'm glad that people like Pasteur, Gallileo, Einstein, and Lister didn't think it was the end all, and be all, of human knowledge.

No one said that the Bible has to be the end of our knowledge.

We have a brain and the ability to think, and discover new things. However, the Bible is the infalliable word of God. And when we start to come up with things to explain or unexplain him, we are not using our minds correctly. We are trying to be smarter than God.

Like we have talked about, with you placing your logic before God.

Originally posted by Dio Seijuro
According to the bible, is the devil a universal neccessity or an inconvenience to god? Is there any inconvenience, or undesirable condition, that god can not remove?

Absolutely.

And God will remove Satan forever, when he casts him into the lake of fire.



Does god have a duty, responsibility, or purpose? If so, to what/whom does god owe such?

God can do anything and everything.

He created the world. He answers our prayers. He has provided us a life, and an enternal life, if we are simply ask to be saved. He guides us through life as the Holy Ghost. He intervenes at our time of need. He provides us with family, friends, and partners that move our life toward completeness. He gave us the beauty of the Earth. He loves us all.

If you trust in God...and in cases, even if you dont, God does so much for us. It really is amazing.

Originally posted by jerejerebinks
And God will remove Satan forever, when he casts him into the lake of fire.
Any reason he hasn't done so already?

Originally posted by jerejerebinks
No one said that the Bible has to be the end of our knowledge.

We have a brain and the ability to think, and discover new things. However, the Bible is the infalliable word of God. And when we start to come up with things to explain or unexplain him, we are not using our minds correctly. We are trying to be smarter than God.

Like we have talked about, with you placing your logic before God.

So when Arnauer Hansen looked in the Bible and saw a cure for Leprosy, he should have ignored the fact that millions of people were suffering from the disease because the "cure" is given to us in the "infallible" Bible. He was obviously using his mind "incorrectly" when he discovered that the disease was caused by a bacterium, and he set out to find a real cure. Obviously he must have thought he was smarter than God.

Originally posted by BorgHunter
Any reason he hasn't done so already?

Because God allowed Satan an amount of time, before he will first be thrown into the bottomless pit, and then, into the lake of fire.

Originally posted by Vilepagan
So when Arnauer Hansen looked in the Bible and saw a cure for Leprosy, he should have ignored the fact that millions of people were suffering from the disease because the "cure" is given to us in the "infallible" Bible. He was obviously using his mind "incorrectly" when he discovered that the disease was caused by a bacterium, and he set out to find a real cure. Obviously he must have thought he was smarter than God.

Do you, Pagan, know if the cure listed in the bible does or does not work?

Or are you just acting as if it doesnt?

Have you tested the cure??? Have you applied it to someone you now who has had leprosy?

Or are you just acting as if you have?

So why then do souls go to hell for all eternity? When Satan is gone, who runs the show?

Because God allowed Satan an amount of time, before he will first be thrown into the bottomless pit, and then, into the lake of fire.
This may sound like an obvious question, but, why?

Do you, Pagan, know if the cure listed in the bible does or does not work?
My guess is the thousands of years in which people had leprosy and had to be exiled, and now we really don't have any leprosy(minus Africa, but on a global scale, they don't really count since they have everything and even Asia is beating them)

Originally posted by jerejerebinks
Because God allowed Satan an amount of time, before he will first be thrown into the bottomless pit, and then, into the lake of fire.
Why? Why wait, why not get it over with? God must be a procrastinator...

Originally posted by Evil Homer
So why then do souls go to hell for all eternity? When Satan is gone, who runs the show?

I dont necessarily think that the devil runs the show now.

Originally posted by Blibblob

This may sound like an obvious question, but, why?

and this may sound like an obvious answer, but I dont know, thats something you have to ask God.

Originally posted by Blibblob

My guess is the thousands of years in which people had leprosy and had to be exiled, and now we really don't have any leprosy(minus Africa, but on a global scale, they don't really count since they have everything and even Asia is beating them)

That answer is actually quite irrelevant, because I am asking Pagan if he actually knows rather or not the suggested cure works. Do we know the cure was attempted on any of the people in Africa that still have it?

Originally posted by jerejerebinks
Do you, Pagan, know if the cure listed in the bible does or does not work?

Yes.

Have you tested the cure???
No. I don't have to test it to know that it doesn't work, just like I don't have to jump off a cliff to see if gravity is still in effect.

Have you applied it to someone you now who has had leprosy?

No, because I don't know anyone with leprosy, and neither do you. You know why that is jere? Because scientists discovered a real cure, and didn't rely on the Bible, or prayer, or God, to do it for them. If these scientists all believed the same nonsense you do, you wouldn't be able to swing a dead cat without hitting a leper. Come to think of it, I think maybe a dead cat is part of the cure listed in the Bible.

Or are you just acting as if you have?

I'm just acting like I have some common sense. Leprosy is caused by a bacterium jere...that's how I know that smearing blood on birds will do nothing to cure the disease. Not then, not now, not ever.

....But of course you have never seen it unproved. You have never seen someone or even read or heard of anyone recieving that procedure and not being cured of the disease the same way you havent heard of them being cured.

So you are simply suggesting you do not think it works, because the other means does. Although you have not seen either in use.

Originally posted by jerejerebinks
....But of course you have never seen it unproved. You have never seen someone or even read or heard of anyone recieving that procedure and not being cured of the disease the same way you havent heard of them being cured.

So you are simply suggesting you do not think it works, because the other means does. Although you have not seen either in use.
Blood of a bird, blood of a lamb, and oil do not have any antibacterial properties. Not seperately, not mixed together, never.

Ah, but this is all irrelevant! YOU have the burden of proof, thus YOU have to prove that this supposed cure does indeed cure oneself of leprosy! If you cannot, it is to be supposed that the cure does not work, as there would exist no proof that it does.

Originally posted by jerejerebinks
So you are simply suggesting you do not think it works, because the other means does. Although you have not seen either in use.

No. let me make this clear...I'm not suggesting I think it doesn't work...I'm saying flat-out that I know it doesn't work.

The reasons are as follows:

A. Common sense tells me that if a cure for leprosy had existed 2000 years ago, we wouldn't still be plagued by the disease.

B. If this biblical cure worked, it would have spread around the world like wildfire, and everyone would be Christians today based on this biblical miracle.

C. The disease is caused by a bacterium, and even my rudimentary knowledge of biology tells me that the bacterium would be completely unaffected by the ritual mentioned in the Bible, just as the disease would be unaffected by witchcraft or Voodoo.

Originally posted by Vilepagan
No. let me make this clear...I'm not suggesting I think it doesn't work...I'm saying flat-out that I know it doesn't work.
Well, you'd better update your profile, because the only way you could "flat-out know" that it doesn't work is to have been with the nation of Israel 3000 years ago when God was using this ceremonial method of cleansing to cure leprosy.

I suppose you were also around 5 million years ago and shook hands with "Lucy" thus "proving" the "fact" of evolution.:rolleyes:

Originally posted by UnCoolDuck
Well, you'd better update your profile, because the only way you could "flat-out know" that it doesn't work is to have been with the nation of Israel 3000 years ago when God was using this ceremonial method of cleansing to cure leprosy.

Well Uncool, I know that it won't cure leprosy today, and because I have a fully functional brain, I don't automatically assume that that people were successfully using this method 3000 years ago because it says so in the Bible. You on the other hand, being a paragon of reason and logic, believe that since it's in the Bible it must be true because the Bible says that everything in the Bible is true. What truly excellent reasoning that is.


I suppose you were also around 5 million years ago and shook hands with "Lucy" thus "proving" the "fact" of evolution.:rolleyes:

C'mon Uncool, you can do better than that. I've never said you must be wrong about the Bible simply because you weren't there when it was written. Pretty lame argument.

Originally posted by Vilepagan
Well Uncool, I know that it won't cure leprosy today, and because I have a fully functional brain, I don't automatically assume that that people were successfully using this method 3000 years ago because it says so in the Bible. You on the other hand, being a paragon of reason and logic, believe that since it's in the Bible it must be true because the Bible says that everything in the Bible is true. What truly excellent reasoning that is.
I thank you for such kind and complimentary words.



C'mon Uncool, you can do better than that. I've never said you must be wrong about the Bible simply because you weren't there when it was written. Pretty lame argument.
Well, I'm sorry to disappoint you, Vil. Since I'm so lame, why don't you help me out and tell me how you "flat out know" what was going on 3000 years ago? If you "flat out know" the Bible is wrong, then why don't you "flat out" prove it?:rolleyes:

Originally posted by UnCoolDuck
I thank you for such kind and complimentary words.

You're welcome Uncool. Thank you for the snide remarks about needing to update my profile, and shaking hands with Lucy.

Well, I'm sorry to disappoint you, Vil. Since I'm so lame, why don't you help me out and tell me how you "flat out know" what was going on 3000 years ago? If you "flat out know" the Bible is wrong, then why don't you "flat out" prove it?:rolleyes:

I've posted my reasons before, but I'll add to them.

A. Common sense tells me that if a cure for leprosy had existed 2000 years ago, we wouldn't still be plagued by the disease.

B. If this biblical cure worked, it would have spread around the world like wildfire, and everyone would be Christians today based on this biblical miracle.

C. The disease is caused by a bacterium, and even my rudimentary knowledge of biology tells me that the bacterium would be completely unaffected by the ritual mentioned in the Bible, just as the disease would be unaffected by witchcraft or Voodoo.

From the Bible and other ancient records we have an excellent description of the disease, and its effects upon it's victims, so we can be pretty certain the disease is the same disease we see today. It is possible, and even likely, that since ancient times the bacterium has mutated to one degree or another, but it still seems highly unlikely that a bacterium would be affected by the bizarre ritual mentioned in the Bible unless some supernatural intervention occurred.

The disease is a very nasty one, and produces physical disfigurement, and debilitating injuries through a slow degeneration of the victims nerves.

The bacillus attacks nerve endings and destroys the body's ability to feel pain and injury. Without feeling pain, people injure themselves on fire, thorns, rocks, even hot coffee cups. Injuries become infected and result in tissue loss. Fingers and toes become shortened and deformed as the cartilage is absorbed into the body.

Early signs include discolored or light patches on the skin with loss of feeling. When nerve trunks in the arm are affected, part of the hand becomes numb and small muscles become paralyzed, leading to curling of the fingers and thumb. When leprosy attacks nerves in the legs, it interrupts communication of sensation in the feet.

The feet can become subject to erosion through untended wounds and infection. If the facial nerve is affected, a person loses the blinking reflex of the eye, which can eventually lead to dryness, ulceration, and blindness. Bacilli entering the mucous lining of the nose can lead to internal damage and scarring which in time causes the nose to collapse. Untreated, leprosy can cause deformity, crippling, and blindness.

Note the disease itself doesn't kill you, but in an antibiotic-free environment, it would kill it's victims through gangrene infections and the like.

Leprosy is not very contagious. It can be transmitted through coughing or sneezing, but humans today have a 95% immunity to leprosy.

In the ancient world the disease would have visited only a small segment of the population with a horribly disfiguring disease, singling these people out in a very superstitious environment. Although the disease won't spread rapidly because of our natural immunity, in the ancient world communities were much more insular than today, and most villages, clans, tribes, or whatever would be less genetically diverse than today. This would mean that occasionally leprosy would find a town or village that it could infect with a fervor, and it would seem as though everyone was stricken by some divine retribution.

I suspect that a "cure" for leprosy was mentioned in the Bible simply because it was a horrible disease that carried a lot of psychological baggage with it, and people would have been desperate for any kind of hope against this nasty plague. It certainly wouldn't have hurt the recruiting prospects in the early church to go around talking about a cure either.

At any rate, we know what the disease is, and what it does to it's victims. We know how bacteria live, something about how they function, and in many cases how to kill them off when we need to. None of the proven bacteria killing methods involve sacrificing birds, or applying oil to the patient's big toe.

I can say I "know" that the Bible's cure for leprosy would not be efficacious in ridding someone of the disease and still remain within the bounds of logic and reason, yet can you explain how the cure would work without bringing a supernatural explanation into the discussion?

DAMMIT, no ignoring my post allowed! I'll post it again to make sure...
Originally posted by jerejerebinks
....But of course you have never seen it unproved. You have never seen someone or even read or heard of anyone recieving that procedure and not being cured of the disease the same way you havent heard of them being cured.

So you are simply suggesting you do not think it works, because the other means does. Although you have not seen either in use.
Blood of a bird, blood of a lamb, and oil do not have any antibacterial properties. Not seperately, not mixed together, never.

Ah, but this is all irrelevant! YOU have the burden of proof, thus YOU have to prove that this supposed cure does indeed cure oneself of leprosy! If you cannot, it is to be supposed that the cure does not work, as there would exist no proof that it does.

Originally posted by Vilepagan
You're welcome Uncool. Thank you for the snide remarks about needing to update my profile, and shaking hands with Lucy.
Why thank you. I thought those were funny as well. Every once in a while I come up with something good. Not very often (I'm sure you will agree);)

I thank you for your lengthy description of leprosy. I don't deny any of it, except for a few exceptions.

In your point B, you stated that if the cure for leprosy worked, it would have spread like wildfire and everyone in the world would be Christians. I disagree. Jesus performed many miracles, yet few believed. People don't disbelieve due to a lack of evidence for God. The evidence is too abundant. They disbelieve because they find the Bible's commentary on the human condition offensive.

I believe that God used the healing method prescribed in the Bible supernaturally in the nation of Israel, when He led that nation directly. This was part of the ceremonial law. With the advent of Christ, the ceremonial law was fulfilled and God no longer heals leprosy in this supernatural way.

Of course, I will acknowledge that science is inadequate to explain this, therefore I cannot prove it in a scientific way, nor can anyone "flat out know" that it didn't work.

Originally posted by UnCoolDuck
Jesus performed many miracles, yet few believed.

You mean the Bible says Jesus performed many miracles, yet few believed. I think we've pretty much gotten to the point where neither of us "knows" anything, since neither one of us was around back then.

People don't disbelieve due to a lack of evidence for God. The evidence is too abundant. They disbelieve because they find the Bible's commentary on the human condition offensive.

People also disbelieve because it's an incredible tale.

Originally posted by Vilepagan
You mean the Bible says Jesus performed many miracles, yet few believed. I think we've pretty much gotten to the point where neither of us "knows" anything, since neither one of us was around back then.
I understand your point. However, my contention was, that even if the cure for leprosy worked today, there would still be many people who would find some reason not to believe.


People also disbelieve because it's an incredible tale.
Before, you told me that I would be a "nut case" to say that someone other than myself was desperately wicked. The Bible says that we all are. Therefore I came to the conclusion that you found the Bible's commentary on the human condition offensive and that was at least part of the reason that you disbelieve. I get this same impression from others that I talk to. People just don't like to be told that they are not good.

Originally posted by UnCoolDuck

Before, you told me that I would be a "nut case" to say that someone other than myself was desperately wicked. The Bible says that we all are.

What I said was, that when you go around saying we are all terribly wicked and deserve God's wrath, you "seem' like a nutcase. It just reminds me of all those guys you see carrying the signs that say "Repent! The end is near!"

Therefore I came to the conclusion that you found the Bible's commentary on the human condition offensive and that was at least part of the reason that you disbelieve.

When the Bible sticks with generalities it makes some good points, but when it drifts into specifics, the biases of its writers begin to show.

I get this same impression from others that I talk to. People just don't like to be told that they are not good.

I think worrying about how good or evil someone else might be is a very unprofitable pastime, and not a particularly Christian thing to do.

I think worrying about how good or evil someone else might be is a very unprofitable pastime, and not a particularly Christian thing to do.

:)

People don't disbelieve due to a lack of evidence for God. The evidence is too abundant. They disbelieve because they find the Bible's commentary on the human condition offensive.

I wonder how you know exactly what is going on in ther minds of over TWO THIRDS of the worlds population. That is how many people DO NOT believe in your god. Over FOUR BILLION people. Pretty amazing. You should get yourself a job as a late night phone phsychic.

Originally posted by Vilepagan
B. If this biblical cure worked, it would have spread around the world like wildfire, and everyone would be Christians today based on this biblical miracle.



Sorry that Its taken me a few days to respond to everyone, I had to attend some DECA Training out of state....

Anyhow....

I like your point B.


So youre telling me that if this cure was proven, it would actually mean everyone would be Christians??? Although, there are countless other things that we have been mentioning as proof, and your best answers were "Its intereptable."

Seems like your trying to over exaggerate yourself a tad bit to me.

Originally posted by Vilepagan
I think worrying about how good or evil someone else might be is a very unprofitable pastime, and not a particularly Christian thing to do.
I wholeheartedly agree, which is why I don't worry about how good or evil other people are. However, when someone asks me my beliefs about the human condition, as people in this forum have, I do try to give an accurate commentary as described in the Bible, particularly Romans 3.

Originally posted by Echo2
I wonder how you know exactly what is going on in ther minds of over TWO THIRDS of the worlds population. That is how many people DO NOT believe in your god. Over FOUR BILLION people. Pretty amazing. You should get yourself a job as a late night phone phsychic.
Although I'm thrilled at your high opinion of my intuition, I must admit that I don't know what's going on in the mind of 2/3 of the world's population. I don't even believe I ever said I did. I only know what the Bible says about unbelief, and I know what people tell me. And when I talk to people, I find out that usually they don't want to believe because they found the Bible scary, or they had a bad experience in Catholic school growing up, or they had a bad experience with other Christians, or the Bible views certain activities that they engage in as sin.

I also thank you for your career advice, but given the Bible's stance on fortune telling, I'll have to take a pass on your suggestion that I become a late night phone psychic.:rolleyes: