Re: [Christian-Philosophy] Re: Fw: Gays launch hate attack against Mormons
- Andre Traversa wrote:
>You're putting words into my mouth, and attempting to set up a straw man
> Saying the bible is historically reliable and saying it's the Word of
> God are two entirely different things.
argument. Please stick to the actual words on the page and dont read
into them. I'm not so clever that what I say is anything other than what
I said we have historical evidence which shows that what the Bible says
is true. And I asked for the same evidence from the B.O.M or U.B.
No, I am not a Deist; I am not suggesting that God is aloof or indifferent to our concerns.
But God is above and beyond national battles and grievances.
Thanking God for victory in war is a legitimate step in religious
evolution; but it's something we should grow beyond.
God has certainly acted in history, the Incarnation is a prime example of
that. God also sends a part of Hismelf to indwell the minds of human
But God doesn't need to promote genocide in order to participate in our individual lives.
On Thu, 4 Dec 2008, John Moon wrote:
> Its your ethical problem actually, People wrote in the way they
> understood, its called Sitz im Leben
> even today when we win a war....We say a prayer of thanks to the
> deity( NO doubt you have participated in such national prayers for our
> And yet according to you this is entirely erroneous, we should not
> attribute the success or failure of our daily events To God or his
> Actions on this earth
> Which begs the question... when the writer is thanking God for
> removing a mortal enemy( By victory in war) Something we would also do
> Because they were evil because they were against God...Because God had
> ordained this and supported you.?
> If God doesn't participate in at least Tacitly allowing these things
> or participating in daily life. What does God actually do? why pray to
> if he does nothing? If he does NOT Act in the lives of man on a daily
> or occasional basis.
> For that is what you propose
> A GOd so alien and indisposed that he never participated nor guided a
> people, and does not today.
> So which is it? A do nothing God,..l Or one that does act in the lives
> of men
> On Dec 3, 2008, at 12:22 PM, Andre Traversa wrote:
>> e have human laws against civilian atrocities; that's what the geneva
>> convention is for. Does tht make us more loving and more humane than
>> God? Some "God" in the OT.
>> This biblical God has ethical problems by any reasonable standard.
> Yahoo! Groups Links