I dreamt that God had two colors. Love and hate. Mostly hate.

[Gnostic]

I dreamt that God had two colors. Love and hate. Mostly hate. What did it mean? God says to love the sinner and hate the sin. But scriptures say that, at the end of days, the numbers of souls in hell will far surpass the number of souls in heaven. The wide road as compared to the narrow road. If, at the end of days, God must destroy that many of us in the lake of fire, his hate would have to be much greater than the love he has for the relatively few that he will cling to and love in the place for eternal and ignorant bliss, heaven. To my way of thinking, it would be impossible to kill with love in one’s heart and so God would have to have hate in his when he kills instead of cures all those souls. We do know that God does not need or have to kill, but will, and God cannot have love in his heart when he does. That would be monstrous. I know that love and hate for souls are not necessarily proportional but even at ten to one, God must end with a lot more hate than love in his heart when he pours the vast majority of us into the lake of fire. How then can God ask us to love sinners and hate the sin when he hates the sinner and we are to follow his lead? Regards DL

[snoop]

It's because you do what God says and no what He does. What a fuckin lame parent haha. Anyway, are we to assume that morality exists (because God made it) and operate within the limits of the Bible, Torah, and Quran? Or are we free to interject a bit of tame philosophy in this?

[Gnostic]

It's because you do what God says and no what He does. What a fuckin lame parent haha. Anyway, are we to assume that morality exists (because God made it) and operate within the limits of the Bible, Torah, and Quran? Or are we free to interject a bit of tame philosophy in this? Follow your bliss my friend. Threads always take off in different directions and I go with the flow. Within reason. Regards DL

[Sivason]

1) assuming you can draw truthful conclusions about God because of something written in an old book is a bit simplified and questionable. 2) can not kill with love in your heart? That is not my experience when putting sick animals to sleep. I cry hot and burning tears that feel as much like love as any thing else I have experienced.

[Gnostic]

1) assuming you can draw truthful conclusions about God because of something written in an old book is a bit simplified and questionable. 2) can not kill with love in your heart? That is not my experience when putting sick animals to sleep. I cry hot and burning tears that feel as much like love as any thing else I have experienced. You cannot cure. God can. See the difference? Regards DL

[Sageous]

The OP is one of those of those arguments wherin I wish God, if He exists, would log on Himself and explain the logic in His Own Words; or at least tell us He didn't write the damn Bibles, so stop taking it all so literally and seriously, fer Crissakes.

[Gnostic]

The OP is one of those of those arguments wherin I wish God, if He exists, would log on Himself and explain the logic in His Own Words; or at least tell us He didn't write the damn Bibles, so stop taking it all so literally and seriously, fer Crissakes. I agree that none should read any holy book as literal. The problem is that some do and the damage they do is quite extensive. For the evils of religion to grow, read any scripture literally. Any and all harmless beliefs are allowed by Gnostic Christians. We know that any myth can be internalized for good results and as esoteric ecumenists, we enjoy knowledge of all the myths that man has created about Gods. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oR02...list=PLCBF574D When there is a victim is when that view changes. Then you see why Christianity annihilated Gnostic Christianity. We do not let the evils of forced literalism go unopposed. To a tyrant like Constantine, we were poison. One of his first commands to his new Church was to kill off the free thinkers and of course, his new tool, his Church, did as bid. It was quite a ride for free thought for the next 1,000 years. How can a Gnostic Christian, --- and any other free thinking moral person, --- not judge other's morals when seeing someone hurt other because of the same Church's teachings today? Can you ignore such things if you have decent morals? Impossible. Especially with Islam pulling the same murderous, freedom stifling ****. We must discriminate and judge constantly. Every law is a compulsion on all of us to judge. It is my view that all right wing literalists and fundamentals hurt all of us who are moral religionists, --- as well as those who do not believe. Literalists hurt their parent religions --- and everyone else, be he a believer or not. Literalists and the right wing of religions make us all into laughing stocks. Their God of talking animals, genocidal floods and retribution has got to go. So must beliefs in fantasy, miracles and magic. These are all evil. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2zhlDbMfDg They also do much harm to their own fellow adherents. African witches and Jesus https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlRG9gXriVI Jesus Camp 1of 3 LiveLeak.com - Jesus Camp - Part 1 (3) Death to Gays. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyuKLyGUHNE For evil to grow my friend, all good people need do is nothing. Fight literalism when you can. It is your duty to our fellow man. Regards DL P.S. A bit of Gnostic history and view. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oR02...list=PLCBF574D

[Sageous]

I agree that none should read any holy book as literal. Though that -- and the rest of your post was quite thoughtful and I agree with pretty much all of it, it had nothing to do at has nothing to do with my post, which was this: The OP is one of those of those arguments wherein I wish God, if He exists, would log on Himself and explain the logic in His Own Words; or at least tell us He didn't write the damn Bibles, so stop taking it all so literally and seriously, fer Crissakes. What I said really had nothing to do with literally interpreting the Bible, or any "holy" book, though I can see that my wording might have headed you in that direction -- sorry!. What I was saying was, quite simply, that, given that pretty much every record of God's deeds was written by men, working through filters of individuals' opinions, agendas, misconceptions fears and hopes that likely would make the Word have little to do with what God may have meant, even if it did come directly from Him. And, worse, if it was not His Word (and deeds) but just inventions by well-meaning authors, the actual case for God is even more in the hands of humans, and not God Himself. With all that, it would be nice if God would just stop by and correct the record in Person, with Words we can take literally. In other words, I was saying, rhetorically, that it would be nice if God actually showed up and explained Himself, rather than having fallible humans do the explaining for Him. Yes, literally believing the Bible is (obviously) not a good choice, but that wasn't my point. I guess my point was that there are no holy books, only things we call holy books, and it would be nice if God presented us with a definitive volume Himself, and in it explain the things He's done (or the things He never did at all, but that humans attributed to Him), in words that we both understand and will know without question were written by Him. You'd think an omniscient, omnipotent creator could do such a thing with ease, and I was just saying it would have been nice if He did. So, though all those links and references were thoughtful, you were very much preaching to the choir in my case: I get the whole literal interpretation problem, and am familiar with much of its history; I only wish God would care about what's been done to His reputation down here.

[Alric]

The God written in the bible is like some drunken husband who beats his wife daily and humans are the wife going, "It is all my fault he hits me, I am bad because I didn't love him enough."

[juroara]

well....that's your perception of it......!

[Gnostic]

well....that's your perception of it......! What is your perception of it? Regards DL

[Sivason]

The biblical God burned some of the best men in the community alive because they did not trust that with his aid they could concer the promised land. After burning them alive he chose to follow their advice and hold off the invasion.

[Gnostic]

The biblical God burned some of the best men in the community alive because they did not trust that with his aid they could concer the promised land. After burning them alive he chose to follow their advice and hold off the invasion. Chapter and verse please. Regards DL

[petersonad]

I don't believe in the Bible.

[Gnostic]

I don't believe in the Bible. Only fools will. As a myth though, it is quite enlightening. If you reverse the usual Christian interpretation as they call evil good. Regards DL