GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Boy, it sure in nice that people hate me somewhere.
Your impression is incorrect. It takes a lot of effort to become hated by somebody, and so far you haven't done enough (in fact, you're very very very far from that point).
I don't think that the amount of hate a person perceives as being directed at them is a very good gauge of their religion.
I don't use it as a guage but it sure is reassuring:
If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.--John 15:19
Understood. Well then, will someone tell me, "What is a 'troll'."
Does Google not work for you?
And please bear in mind that folks here don't hate you (although to your very flawed logic, I'm sure it seems so)...you're irritating folks here. You're reasoning in circles, and posting content that is very off topic. You are INTENTIONALLY trying to goad people into a pointless argument with you. The only thing you seem to respond to is someone agreeing with you.
why is the first statement wrong when the second is true? Can you please elaborate?
Sure. As you know, we Christians hold that God is all-knowing, and can discern good and evil. Man, even having been created god-like, with knowledge, nevertheless, is not omniscient, and cannot always discern between the two. God did not create them to have to discern good and evil. Yet, since the fall, good and evil is part of the human experience. It would be better, since we are not perfectly discerning to have what is pure, without having subjected ourselves to something we're not big enough to handle.
You are INTENTIONALLY trying to goad people into a pointless argument with you.
Actually, I'm here (in the General Forum) to prove Christ. This community, helpful in many respects, is bent on disproving me in this subject, besides the numerous members who've been silent.
This community, helpful in many respects, is bent on disproving me in this subject
I would think that trying to disprove you is helping you to become a better apologist. The reason is that it helps you test and refine your arguments. Do you not agree?
My intent certainly isn't to annoy anyone. I'm just saying, as a Christian, not really having met with enmity in places I frequent--among family, friends, relatives and church, a Christian has his doubts from descriptions of Jesus' followers in the Bible. Meeting enmity here, incidentally, can be reassuring in some ways.
Usually, when people are annoyed, they'll just ignore. Considering I've had over 400 hits in less than 5 hours, I think it's more than that. I think there's some people here who know there's a God, and will not concede. I think there are some people here, who agree with me who are silent. I think there's mixed thoughts and emotions. And I think a lot of it is good!
Have you even read what I have written?
My statement:
Quote:
The only thing that happened after the fall is that mankind was knowing good and evil.
Your statement:
Quote:
Yet, since the fall, good and evil is part of the human experience.
Both statements are the same, so why is my statement wrong, but your statement true?
Quote:
without having subjected ourselves to something we're not big enough to handle.
May I ask where the bible states that we are not big enough to handle the experience of good and evil?
I can only repeat what was written there:
Quote:
The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.
So in god's opinion we are now like him, except that he doesn't want us to live forever, which seems to be the only thing that divides us from god. So if it is your opinion that we are not big enough to handle good and evil than shouldn't it be not also your opinion that god is not big enough to handle those things?
Quote:
As you know, we Christians hold that God is all-knowing
This leads to the same question as before, still unanswered. If god knows that we will eat those fruits, why has he created them? If it was his will for us to know good and evil he could have created us that way and just not the fruits at all. That way he wouldn't had to make us leave the garden of eden. But he chose to not do that. Another sign of his cruelty?
I would think that trying to disprove you is helping you to become a better apologist. The reason is that it helps you test and refine your arguments. Do you not agree?
Actually, I'm here (in the General Forum) to prove Christ. This community, helpful in many respects, is bent on disproving me in this subject, besides the numerous members who've been silent.
people have been unsuccessfully trying to do that for about two thousand years now. Isn't it a little presumptuous to think you can pull it off?
Have you even read what I have written?
My statement:
Quote:
The only thing that happened after the fall is that mankind was knowing good and evil.
Your statement:
Quote:
Yet, since the fall, good and evil is part of the human experience.
Both statements are the same, so why is my statement wrong, but your statement true?
All I'm saying is we are not better off having disobeyed God. We were better off when we were "less sophisticated," regarding good and evil.
God is all-knowing, and can discern good and evil.
Is there really good and evil?
(IMO) Based on my life experience, I have a strong impression that "there is no good and evil, only shades of gray" (action and consequences). In other words, everything in this world simply exist or happens, and same event will be perceived by "good" or "bad" by different people/at different time. Every action benefits someone and harms someone else. Another problem that thinking in "good/bad" terms doesn't look like a good idea - it is a "binary logic" that is too simple to be applied to real world, so if you'll keep using those concepts for a long time (IMO) you'll eventually lose ability to perceive "gray area" at all.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.