The myth of free will

winner08

Well-Known Member
Messages
415
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I have been told in this thread that it the way I posted my title that threw people off.
The myth of free will.
someone said I should have wrote the myth of free UNCAUSED will.
OK maby my post title didn't clearly explained what I meant.
I'm not a teacher
But I stick by my statement free will is a myth you don't have a free will.
you do have to make your own choices.
You are RESPONSIBLE for the choices you make.
Free Will: not CAUSED by anything or anyone, any internal or external force or influences. Being totally free from CAUSES. It can not happen it is impossible for anybody to make a choice without A CAUSE impossible. every single time one makes a choice about anything there is a CAUSE behined that choice.
not have free will DOES NOT MEAN YOU CAN NOT MAKE A CHOICE.
not having free will DOES NOT MEAN YOU ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CHOICES YOU MAKE.
If God's Will is ALWAYS DONE (ALWAYS), THEN HOW CAN YOUR WILL BE DONE. it is impossible. it can not happen. Your will can not be done if God's Will is ALWAYS done.
Just because God's will is ALWAYS done does not mean one does not make choices.
God creats the circumstances we find ourselves into. WE# however make our own choices.

Dailouge is the best said sometimes our will and choices are CAUSED by something or someone. Internal or external CAUSES.

No not sometimes All the time. I dare to say not one of you can tell me a choice you made that there was NO CAUSE. NO CASUSE WHATSOEVER> You can't do. there is ALWAYS A CAUSE.
There is ALWAYS A CAUSE behind EVER choice someone made during one's life time.
 

winner08

Well-Known Member
Messages
415
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I think we all had enough of this thread. I have my belief and you have yours. No one is going to change no one's mind. So lets just say we agree to disagree.I believe it is time to move on. One has to admit that this thread has sparked some very good debate and isn't that's what it's all about sharing each others beliefs. Shareing information. Well if this is what this site does then I must say we shared o whole lot of info. and we had great discussions. I do think it is time to move on. I am sure we will do this again soon with another topic.
If I have been rude to anybody if I have offended anybody or hurt anybod's feelings I am sorry. Please forgive me I did not mean it. Once again I am sorry if I hurt anybody by my posts that wasn't what I wanted to do, sometimes it got heated and passion flies I did't mean anything by it. I have alot of respect for everyone here and I thank you for your inputs and time. I know this topic took alot of both.

Thanks everybody,

Darren

PS see ya on the flip side.
 

winner08

Well-Known Member
Messages
415
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Followed nicley by this.....



.....

Darren... Those who believe they know bettter than YHWH, create evil... YHWH doesn, hasn't, will NEVER(as you seem to like caps) create evil.... Examples of those which beleive to be better leaders/judges than him? Look in a history book many shall be found... Look in the bible many shall be found, they take the form and title of MAN..... It doesn't stop here however it started with an angel who with his free will decided he too knew what was best..... I think we know that one.

Do not take my word however, look to the bible.... I will offer you a couple sciptures to get you on your way..... 1 John 4:16.... We are told YHWH IS Love, there is no hate, no selfishness, no greed, no evil, not even a drop of it in love... Love is pure, love is clean..... Love... Is, good.

Paul the apostle what did he say of YHWH in 2 Cor 13:11 he calls him the god of.... Love and peace... Evil knows not these things, and Righteousness doesn't dabble in evil.


Ok then try to twist this scripture around and tell they don't say that God abslutely created evil.

Isa 45:7

KVJ> I Form the light and create darkness I make peace and I create evil I the Lord do ALL THESE THINGS.

KJVR- I form the light and create darkness I make peace and create EVIL I the Lord do ALL THESES THINGS.

LITV- Forming the light and creating darkness making peace and creating EVIL I Jehovah do all THESE THINGS

YLT Forming the light and preparing darkness making peace and PREPARING EVIL I am Jehovah DOING ALL THESE THINGS.

God can''t do evil He is love so why do you thin God created Satan.

You must not believe in Gods word, because you most certainly don't believe in scripture and scripture is the word of God. go ahead and show me ONE scripture that says that God did NOT create evil.
I showed you the exact word for word now you do the same.
Not that God is love because that does NOT say He did not create evil. We all know God is love.

with respect,
Darren
 

winner08

Well-Known Member
Messages
415
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Let me just remind everybody just because God is not evil does not mean He did not create evil.
Just because God is love does not mean He created evil

There is not one scripture in the Bible that says God did not create evil. Just the oppisite The Bible Plainly say that God is the creator or evil.
Once again I nor the Bible said God WAS evil. Just the oppisite God IS love.

If you belive in What Scripture says then you believe God created evil If not you don't believe in what scripture says. it is really simple, is it not?
 

winner08

Well-Known Member
Messages
415
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Why is this so hard to believe? God said so in the Bible. look it up for youself Alex it is in the Bible Isa 45:7 check it out. God word does not contadict. so God is love and He DID createvil. Here's a thought. If God created all things He created Satan. do you think for one min. that it was not in Gods plan for the morning star to be what he is today Satan. God know the end from the beginning. God knows what will happen before it happens so this is God's plan. He created the tree of good and evil why? do you think for one min. that God did not know that eve would eat from the tree? Really come on. one can not suprise God. He already knows. God knew Eve would eat from the tree. God new that Cain would kill Able. God knew you would not believe in His word. Isa 45:7 . read it yourself.
 

juantoo3

....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
Messages
8,172
Reaction score
446
Points
83
Location
up to my arse in alligators
Ok then try to twist this scripture around and tell they don't say that God abslutely created evil.

go ahead and show me ONE scripture that says that God did NOT create evil.
I showed you the exact word for word now you do the same.
Well, to begin, you did *not* show the *exact* word for word, you showed a list of English translations...big difference. I recommend the Interlinear version for the Hebrew original:

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/isa45.pdf

We've been here before in the past about Isaiah 45:7. So what you are covering is hardly profound or unique. Try this thread:

http://www.interfaith.org/forum/there-is-no-such-thing-8529-5.html

or another:

http://www.interfaith.org/forum/the-balance-between-good-and-5400.html

I particularly like this response:

That is the most cited verse supporting the contention of God creating “evil”. However...

Isaiah was juxtaposing opposites, light and darkness, crooked and straight and then “peace and evil? I give Isaiah a bit more credit than that. The two Hebrew words translated as “peace” and “evil” respectively, if given the meanings from their roots: “Shalowm” meaning “whole” and “ra’a” meaning ‘broken”, give us a completely different understanding of the verse.

It would read “I make whole and I break apart”.

Jesus says the same thing in John 12:47, “I have not come to divide the world, but to make the world whole”.

So...why is this so hard to believe? It is taken directly from the Hebrew, rather than the English translation, ;) , that's why. Who are you gonna believe; the Hebrew scripture as it was written, or the English translation cobbled up by whoever with a political axe to grind?

Read it yourself.
 
Last edited:

winner08

Well-Known Member
Messages
415
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Well, to begin, you did *not* show the *exact* word for word, you showed a list of English translations...big difference. I recommend the Interlinear version for the Hebrew original:

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/isa45.pdf

We've been here before in the past about Isaiah 45:7. So what you are covering is hardly profound or unique. Try this thread:

http://www.interfaith.org/forum/there-is-no-such-thing-8529-5.html

or another:

http://www.interfaith.org/forum/the-balance-between-good-and-5400.html

I particularly like this response:



So...why is this so hard to believe? It is taken directly from the Hebrew, rather than the English translation, ;) , that's why. Who are you gonna believe; the Hebrew scripture as it was written, or the English translation cobbled up by whoever with a political axe to grind?

Read it yourself.

Ok not word for word my bad. But It still dosen't change the fact I gave you 4 different translations of the same scripture, and they say the same thing and just because Isa 45:7 is the most quoted scripture on God createing evil dosen't negate the facts that He created evil. What are you saying If Gods word (scripture) is often quoted it's wrong, it's not so? If that is the case you are calling God a lier. God word is scripture and scripture is Gods word and God does not lie or change so it still a fact God created evil He says so. like I said I gave you 4 different translations the same scriptures.
1. KJV
2. KJVR
3. LITV
4. YLT
and they say the same thing useing different words for the word evil. it still means evil and God is the creator of evil, along with everything else.
Still you have not shown me ONE scripture that says God IS NOT the creator of evil. It is plain as day. All this about it's not in hebrew or this and that. still after all you said you still haven't shown me that scripture where God IS NOT the creator of evil. Listen I when translation scripture from one language to another something might get loss. This is why you check more then one reference to acertain scripture I gave 4 thats enough. Give me one.

Darren
 

winner08

Well-Known Member
Messages
415
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Alex you made sure that I understood that YHWH dosen't hasn't and will never create evil. That God is love. You quote John and cor. Yes God is Love and has not one once of evil IN HIM. But John and cor. says nothing about God CREATING evil. If fact you have shown nothing that says God did not create evil. What is the big deal? I am sure you can find a scripture that tells me this. Like you told me look it up for yourself and then show me and I will believe the word of God. Simple.
 

juantoo3

....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
Messages
8,172
Reaction score
446
Points
83
Location
up to my arse in alligators
But It still dosen't change the fact I gave you 4 different translations of the same scripture, and they say the same thing
All that proves is that 4 different translations have problems with losing the scope and nuance...saying something incorrectly 4 times doesn't magically make it right.

and just because Isa 45:7 is the most quoted scripture on God createing evil dosen't negate the facts that He created evil.
Which shows you already are sealed in ignorance. Probably better that way, so you are not accountable.

What are you saying If Gods word (scripture) is often quoted it's wrong, it's not so? If that is the case you are calling God a lier. God word is scripture and scripture is Gods word and God does not lie or change so it still a fact God created evil He says so.
Ah, if you can't be right, be wrong at the top of your voice...and it doesn't hurt to point a finger while screaming "HERETIC!!!" I bet you have the bonfire already lit. ;)

like I said I gave you 4 different translations the same scriptures.
1. KJV
2. KJVR
3. LITV
4. YLT
*ALL* of which are *ENGLISH* translations. Let's test your Bible knowledge: what language was Isaiah written in? I would be willing to bet that Isaiah did *not* write in English, what say you?

A little test to see how well you grasp the translation problems faced by translators, particularly from the original languages into English. All through the Bible one can find the word "divers." What does "divers" mean? Simple question, no need for a drawn out evasion, what is the simple one-word definition for "divers?"

and they say the same thing useing different words for the word evil. it still means evil and God is the creator of evil, along with everything else.
Once we see your grasp of the previous question I posed to you about the word "divers," then we will know how to proceed.

Still you have not shown me ONE scripture that says God IS NOT the creator of evil. It is plain as day.
I *HAVE* shown you the exact same scripture you have shown, and provided a more likely translation. But that would mean you might just be mistaken, and we can't have that, can we?

Now, we can continue being sarcastic to each other, or we can explore the problems inherent in translation together. The choice is yours.

All this about it's not in hebrew or this and that. still after all you said you still haven't shown me that scripture where God IS NOT the creator of evil. Listen I when translation scripture from one language to another something might get loss. This is why you check more then one reference to acertain scripture I gave 4 thats enough. Give me one.
I gave you the most important one. Hebrew. That's the language Isaiah spoke and wrote in, that is the language most of the Old Testament was written in. And that is the language of the Jewish faith. Seems to me that the Jews who have been using the text of Isaiah for almost 3 thousand years, since before Jesus, would have a pretty good idea of what the Hebrew actually meant...rather than what an English (or Roman) church with a political agenda would slip into its place.

So, what does "divers" mean? Please don't try to sidestep this, it is important. If you do not understand this, you will not understand how English translations are not quite fully correct.

Extra credit question: why are the words in italics in the KJV? Is it for emphasis, like in modern grammar? The answer is easily found in the first pages of the first edition of the KJV, which can be found in reprint form.
 

juantoo3

....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
Messages
8,172
Reaction score
446
Points
83
Location
up to my arse in alligators
These are English translational errors unrelated to our discussion, but just the same they serve to demonstrate that translational errors in English are actually pretty common:

KJV
In various printings of the King James Version of the Bible, some of the more famous examples have been given their own names. Among them are:
• The Blasphemous Comma Several editions: Part of Luke 23 reads "And there were also two other malefactors. [crucified with Jesus]" It should have read "And there were also two other, malefactors."
• "Judas Bible" 1611: This Bible has Judas, not Jesus, saying "Sit ye here while I go yonder and pray." (Matthew 26:36)
• "Wicked Bible", "Adulterous Bible" or "Sinner's Bible" 1631: Barker and Lucas: Omits an important "not" from Exodus 20:14, making the seventh commandment read "Thou shalt commit adultery." The printers were fined £300 (a lifetime's wages) and most of the copies were recalled immediately. Only 11 copies are known to exist today.
• "More Sea Bible" 1641 "...the first heaven and the first earth were passed away and there was more sea." rather than "...the first heaven and the first earth were passed away and there was no more sea." (Revelation 21:1)
• "Unrighteous Bible" or "Wicked Bible" 1653: Cambridge Press: Another edition carrying this title omits a "not" before the word "inherit", making I Corinthians 6:9 read "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall inherit the kingdom of God?..." In addition, Romans 6:13 reads "Neither yield ye your members as instruments of righteousness into sin..." where it should read "unrighteousness".
• "Printers Bible" bef. 1702: Psalm 119:161 reads "Printers have persecuted me without cause." The first word was changed, possibly by a disgruntled typesetter, from "Princes".
• "Sin On Bible": 1716: John 8:11 reads "Go and sin on more" rather than "Go and sin no more".
• "Vinegar Bible": 1717: J. Baskett, Clarendon Press: The chapter heading for Luke 20 reads "The Parable of the Vinegar" instead of "The Parable of the Vineyard." One reviewer called this particular edition "a Baskett full of errors," what with its being replete with numerous other specimens of typographical errata throughout. One copy recently sold for $5,000.[3]
• "The Fools Bible": 1763: Psalm 14:1 reads "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God", rather than "...there is no God". The printers were fined three thousand pounds and all copies ordered destroyed.
• "Denial Bible": 1792: The name Philip is substituted for Peter as the apostle who would deny Jesus in Luke 22:34.
• "Murderer's Bible" 1801: "Murmurers" is printed as "murderers", making Jude 16 read: "These are murderers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men's persons in admiration because of advantage."
• "Lions Bible" 1804: 1 Kings 8:19 reads "thy son that shall come forth out of thy lions", rather than "loins". This edition had another error in Numbers 25:18 which read: "The murderer shall surely be put together" rather than "...put to death".
• "To-remain Bible" 1805: In Galatians 4:29 a proof-reader had written in "to remain" in the margin, as an answer to whether a comma should be deleted. The note inadvertently became part of the text, making the edition read "But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit to remain, even so it is now."
• "Discharge Bible" 1806: "Discharge" replaces "charge" making I Timothy 5:21 read "I discharge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality."
• "Standing Fishes Bible" 1806: "Fishes" replaced "fishers" making Ezekiel 47:10 read "And it shall come to pass, that the fishes shall stand upon it from Engedi even unto Eneglaim; they shall be a place to spread forth nets; their fish shall be according to their kinds, as the fish of the great sea, exceeding many."
• "Idle Shepherd" 1809: Zechariah 11:17 reads "the idle shepherd" rather than "idol shepherd".
• "Ears To Ear Bible" 1810: Edition which makes Matthew 13:43 read: "...Who has ears to ear, let him hear." The correct phrase should be "ears to hear".
• "Wife-hater Bible" 1810: "Wife" replaces "life" in this edition, making Luke 14:26 redundantly read "If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own wife also, he cannot be my disciple."
• "The Large Family Bible" 1820: Isaiah 66:9 reads: "Shall I bring to birth and not cease to bring forth?" rather than "Shall I bring to birth and not cause to bring forth?".
• "Rebecca's Camels Bible" 1823: "Camels" replaces "damsels" in one instance, making Genesis 24:61 read "And Rebecca arose, and her camels, and they rode upon the camels, and followed the man: and the servant took Rebecca and went his way."
• "Owl Bible" 1944: "Owl" replaces "own", making 1 Peter 3:5 read, "For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted God, adorned themselves, being in subjection to their owl husbands." The error was caused by a printing plate with a damaged letter n.

Bible errata - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

juantoo3

....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
Messages
8,172
Reaction score
446
Points
83
Location
up to my arse in alligators
The completed work was issued in 1611, the complete title page reading:

"THE HOLY BIBLE, Conteyning the Old Testament, and the New: Newly Translated out of the Originall tongues: & with the former Translations diligently compared and revised, by his Majesties Special Commandment. Appointed to be read in Churches. Imprinted at London by Robert Barker, Printer to the Kings most Excellent Majestie. ANNO DOM. 1611."

The New Testament had a separate title page, the whole of it reading:

"THE NEWE Testament of our Lord and Saviour JESUS CHRIST. Newly Translated out of the Originall Greeke: and with the former Translations diligently compared and revised, by his Majesties speciall Commandment. IMPRINTED at London by Robert Barker, Printer to the Kings most Excellent Majestie. ANNO DOM. 1611. *** Privilegio."

The King James Bible was, in its first editions, even larger than the Great Bible. It was printed in black letter with small italicized Roman type to represent those words *not* in the original languages.

A dedicatory epistle to King James, which also enhanced the completed work, recalled the King's desire that "there should be one more exact Translation of the Holy Scriptures into the English tongue." The translators expressed that they were "poor instruments to make GOD'S holy Truth to be yet more and more known" while at the same time recognizing that "Popish persons" sought to keep the people "in ignorance and darkness."
~emphasis mine, -jt3

Brief History of the King James Bible by Dr. Laurence M. Vance

Extra credit question answered. Eyes to see and ears to hear?
 
Last edited:

juantoo3

....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
Messages
8,172
Reaction score
446
Points
83
Location
up to my arse in alligators
But the tragic part of it all is that the people who still call it the "Authorized Bible" understand by that term something very different from this. They understand it to mean DEVINELY AUTHORIZED (sic). I have today received a letter from a very zealous young minister in Atlantic City, definitely declaring his belief in the verbal inspiration of the King James Version. This extraordinary view is very widely held.

Of course the Translators made no such claim (*Divinely Authorized); indeed, their account of their method of work fits very poorly with such an idea:

"Neither did we think much to consult the Translators or Commentators, Chaldee, Hebrew, Syrian, Greek, or Latin, no nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch; neither did we disdain to revise that which we had done, and to bring back to the anvil that which we had hammered; but having and using as great helps as were needful, and fearing no reproach for slowness, nor coveting praise for expedition, we have at length, through the good hand of the Lord upon us, brought the work to that pass that you see."

"Some peradventure would have no variety of senses to be set in the margin, lest the authority of the Scriptures for deciding controversies by that show of uncertainty, should somewhat be shaken. But we hold their judgment not to be so sound in this point. ... Yet for all that it cannot be dissembled, that partly to exercise and whet our wits, ... and lastly, that we might be forward to seek aid of our brethren by conference, and never scorn those that be not in all respects so complete as they should be, being to seek in many things ourselves, it hath pleased God in his divine providence, here and there to scatter words and sentences of that difficulty and doubtfulness, ... that fearfulness would better beseem us than confidence, and if we will resolve upon modesty with S. Augustine, .... There be many words in the Scriptures, which be never found there but once, ... so that we cannot be helped by conference of places. Again, there be many rare names of certain birds, beasts and precious stones, etc. ... Now in such a case, doth not a margin do well to admonish the Reader to seek further, and not to conclude or dogmatize upon this or that peremptorily? ... Therefore as S. Augustine saith, that variety of Translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures: so diversity of signification and sense in the margin, where the text is not so clear, must need do good, yea, is necessary, as we are persuaded."


These candid, scholarly words of the Translators are not the words of inspired men, oracularly confident of every word they use; they are the unmistakable words of careful, sincere scholars, well aware of the inevitable limitations of their knowledge. The doctrine of the inspiration of the Translators was not held by them, and it is difficult to see how it can be held by anyone who will read even this much of their Preface.

But of course the greatest illusion about the King James Bible is that it is the sole, unique, divine Bible, untouched by human hands. This doctrine, grotesque as it is, is actually held as a matter of course by the vast majority of people. The publication of any preface from the Translators to the Reader would, by its very presence, whatever its contents, do much to remedy this. The superstitious veneration with which some very pious people regard it would be corrected by the reprinting of the Preface.

But not the pious alone. Many editors, novelists, and professors cherish views about the version that are simply slightly rationalized forms of the same notion. Sentimental statements about it in current books and papers that its translators "went about their work in the spirit of little children," or that "it is a finer and nobler literature than the Scriptures in their original tongues," are but survivals of the old dogma of uniqueness, so explicitly disclaimed in the Preface:

"... we are so far off from condemning any of their labors that travelled before us in this kind, either in this land or beyond sea, ... that we acknowledge them to have been raised up by God, ... and that they deserve to be had of us and of posterity, in everlasting remembrance. ... Yet for all that, as nothing is begun and perfected at the same time, and the later thoughts are thought to be the wiser; so, if we building upon their foundation that went before us, and being helped by their labors, do endeavor to make that better which they left so good; no man, we are sure, hath cause to mislike us; they, we persuade ourselves, if they were alive, would thank us."

These great sentences, are well worth reproducing today. I have ventured to lay before the leading publishers of the King James Bible the duty of restoring the great Preface to its rightful place, at the beginning of it (the KJV Bible). They have courteously replied, giving various reasons for continuing to omit it.

The argument of the publishers that the Preface is controversial is also nugatory. The version sprang out of controversy; the Preface reflects the fact; why conceal it? The hushing of the controversy in the history of Christianity does not make for intelligence. The New Testament itself sprang, much of it, out of controversy; I and II Corinthians, for instance. It is precisely this muting that has produced the impression that the version originated in some other, better world than ours. If the Preface shows its human background, let us have it, since it is a part of the truth.

The Translators were well aware that their work would have to encounter strong opposition:


"Zeal to promote the common good, whether it be by devising any thing ourselves, or revising that which hath been labored by others, deserves certainly much respect and esteem, but yet finding but cold entertainment in the world. ... For he that meddles with men's Religion in any part, meddles with their customs, nay, with their freehold, and though they find no content in that which they have, yet they cannot abide to hear of altering [it]. ... Many men's mouths have been open a good while (and yet are not stopped) with speeches about the Translation so long in hand, or rather perusals of Translations made before: and ask what may be the reason, what the necessity of the employment: Hath the Church been deceived, say they, all this while? ... Was their Translation good before? Why do they now mend it? Was it not good? Why then was it obtruded to the people? ..."

Without these trenchant sentences, people are left with the impression that the King James translation descended like the gentle dew from heaven, amidst universal acclaim. The silencing of the controversial note of the Preface puts a false face upon the version, for which its original makers are not to blame.
~emphasis mine, -jt3

Thesis by EJ Goodspeed Regarding the Preface to the KJV 1611
 

juantoo3

....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
Messages
8,172
Reaction score
446
Points
83
Location
up to my arse in alligators
So yes, I think that it is very possible that the English word "evil" in Isaiah 45:7 may well be a mistranslation, one perpetuated by other later English translations. Our friend (in post 148) pointed to a significant consideration...Isaiah is juxtaposing opposites, and the opposite of peace is not evil...therefore a better rendition would probably read more like "make whole" and "broken." Otherwise, like peace/evil, it doesn't make sense in the larger context.

Did G-d create Lucifer? Yes, I can go along with that. Does G-d create every evil circumstance? No, I think most is of our own devices (we do to ourselves and others), some is thrust upon us (karma, fate, destiny...Satan tempting Job), and some isn't really evil in the sense we desire it to be but merely circumstance (natural disaster, wrong place at the wrong time).

Did G-d create the world and all of the natural cycles? Yes. That beautiful garden we call Eden sometimes bites us on the posterior...hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, fire, plague, famine and death. All of this is natural as G-d created, but from the point of view of some people it may seem for a moment as evil.
 
Last edited:

winner08

Well-Known Member
Messages
415
Reaction score
0
Points
0
after all your twisting and spinning you still have not produce one scripture that saids God DID NOT CREAT EVIL. You the one my friend who is ignorent. You are the one calling God a lier You are the one that will have to deal with Him. All that spouting off that you did in all those replies you stll cant firnd a scripture that tells me that God is not the creator of evil. It just goes to show you that you are just like your father the devil. try and try to dicredit the word of God and you can't do it. If there was a hell you would be first in line for calling God a lier.
 

leastone

Well-Known Member
Messages
108
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
'n Plaas in Afrika
after all your twisting and spinning you still have not produce one scripture that saids God DID NOT CREAT EVIL. You the one my friend who is ignorent. You are the one calling God a lier

Easy, now, Winner.

Go easy with the medicine. Those splinters you see in another's eye might be imagined, the product of hallucinations.

I think it is a valid point to consider, as juantoo's valuable contributions made clear, that various translations, their mistakes and motivations, may influence our understanding to reach conclusions that are questionable.

Forgive me for using the quote above to illustrate.
---------------------------------------------------------------

after all your twisting and spinning you still have not produce one scripture
after all your twisting and spinning, you still have not produced one scripture

that saids God DID NOT CREAT EVIL.
that says God DID NOT CREATE EVIL.

You the one my friend who is ignorent.
You're the one my friend, who is ignorant.

You are the one calling God a lier
You are the one calling God a liar
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

You may readily see that writing in another, foreign language, or translating ideas from it, can produce strange results.

Li´er (lī´ẽr)
n.1.One who lies down; one who rests or remains, as in concealment. There were liers in a ambush against him. - Josh. viii. 14.


Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, published 1913 by C. & G. Merriam Co

---------------------------------------------------------------
Wisdom starts with the fear of the Lord, and fear of the Lord, at the every least, acknowledges that it knows very little, if anything at all.

Being ignorant is what the Lord works with best. He gives grace to the humble, while resisting the proud know-it-alls.

Do not allow your zeal to rob you of the humility and respect needed to "consider others higher than yourself."

Serving you in Him,

Sincerely,

Learner


 

juantoo3

....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
Messages
8,172
Reaction score
446
Points
83
Location
up to my arse in alligators
after all your twisting and spinning you still have not produce one scripture that saids God DID NOT CREAT EVIL. You the one my friend who is ignorent. You are the one calling God a lier You are the one that will have to deal with Him. All that spouting off that you did in all those replies you stll cant firnd a scripture that tells me that God is not the creator of evil. It just goes to show you that you are just like your father the devil. try and try to dicredit the word of God and you can't do it. If there was a hell you would be first in line for calling God a lier.

It's OK winner08, the whole time I am burning in the bonfire with you as the roastmaster, I'll be telling you how much I love you and asking the Heavenly Father to forgive you. ;)

I noticed you didn't even try to answer *my* simple question.

What does "divers" mean?
 

winner08

Well-Known Member
Messages
415
Reaction score
0
Points
0
The Lord said I created good and evil I the Lord did all these things
God created Satan . Satan is evil

do you you really believe the christan hoax that Satan was a good angle then turn against God.

Rev20:2 the dragon, that old serpernt which is the devil and satan
Job26:13 By His (God) Spirit He has garnish the heavens, His hand has formed the crooked serpent.

he was a murderer and a lier from the beginning.

Like it or not believe it or not God did create evil.
 

winner08

Well-Known Member
Messages
415
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Easy, now, Winner.

Go easy with the medicine. Those splinters you see in another's eye might be imagined, the product of hallucinations.

I think it is a valid point to consider, as juantoo's valuable contributions made clear, that various translations, their mistakes and motivations, may influence our understanding to reach conclusions that are questionable.

Forgive me for using the quote above to illustrate.
---------------------------------------------------------------

after all your twisting and spinning you still have not produce one scripture
after all your twisting and spinning, you still have not produced one scripture

that saids God DID NOT CREAT EVIL.
that says God DID NOT CREATE EVIL.

You the one my friend who is ignorent.
You're the one my friend, who is ignorant.

You are the one calling God a lier
You are the one calling God a liar
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

You may readily see that writing in another, foreign language, or translating ideas from it, can produce strange results.

Li´er (lī´ẽr)
n.1.One who lies down; one who rests or remains, as in concealment. There were liers in a ambush against him. - Josh. viii. 14.


Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, published 1913 by C. & G. Merriam Co

---------------------------------------------------------------
Wisdom starts with the fear of the Lord, and fear of the Lord, at the every least, acknowledges that it knows very little, if anything at all.

Being ignorant is what the Lord works with best. He gives grace to the humble, while resisting the proud know-it-alls.

Do not allow your zeal to rob you of the humility and respect needed to "consider others higher than yourself."

Serving you in Him,

Sincerely,

Learner

Thanks for your corrections. I guess we all are not a smart as you. Still my incorrect spelling does not change the fact that God did creat evil. You can try to twist it anyway you want blamming on translations or whatever but facts or facts and God truths are in His own words (scriptures) you can believe it or not make fun of it make light of it. change the subject and point out my mistakes. It just shows how none of you can show me any scripture where God says He did not create evil.

God told you and you laugh at Him I feel pitty for yall

Good by and may God have mercy on yall soul
 
Top