Sentences with phrase «evil gods claiming»
Got ta love the robots that follow the money and evil Gods claiming they know the way to eternal life.
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/ Not exact matches
In the absence of God or as some claim that there is no God then Good and evil become relative or subject to the culture and time.
@fimeilleur actually i can back up the claims i make both personally and historically, one example Abraham, Machpelah (actual location of his tomb and remains along with 5 others in Israel right where they are supposed to be) Kedorlaomer king of Elam, (defeated by Abraham and recently discovered) it is said Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness.More than that Abraham saw God and spoke with Him, not the god you are on about that men use to justify their evil intent, but the God who has created all things, the God that no one especially you can not contain.Ignorance is your choice but that will not negate the existence of God in any way.No one that i am aware of has all the answers at this point regarding spiritual things, evolution or evilution there are areas God has not yet revealed to mankind but every day more is discovered.I find it amazing that God is big enough to share discovery even with those who would reject HGod and it was credited to him as righteousness.More than that Abraham saw God and spoke with Him, not the god you are on about that men use to justify their evil intent, but the God who has created all things, the God that no one especially you can not contain.Ignorance is your choice but that will not negate the existence of God in any way.No one that i am aware of has all the answers at this point regarding spiritual things, evolution or evilution there are areas God has not yet revealed to mankind but every day more is discovered.I find it amazing that God is big enough to share discovery even with those who would reject HGod and spoke with Him, not the god you are on about that men use to justify their evil intent, but the God who has created all things, the God that no one especially you can not contain.Ignorance is your choice but that will not negate the existence of God in any way.No one that i am aware of has all the answers at this point regarding spiritual things, evolution or evilution there are areas God has not yet revealed to mankind but every day more is discovered.I find it amazing that God is big enough to share discovery even with those who would reject Hgod you are on about that men use to justify their evil intent, but the God who has created all things, the God that no one especially you can not contain.Ignorance is your choice but that will not negate the existence of God in any way.No one that i am aware of has all the answers at this point regarding spiritual things, evolution or evilution there are areas God has not yet revealed to mankind but every day more is discovered.I find it amazing that God is big enough to share discovery even with those who would reject HGod who has created all things, the God that no one especially you can not contain.Ignorance is your choice but that will not negate the existence of God in any way.No one that i am aware of has all the answers at this point regarding spiritual things, evolution or evilution there are areas God has not yet revealed to mankind but every day more is discovered.I find it amazing that God is big enough to share discovery even with those who would reject HGod that no one especially you can not contain.Ignorance is your choice but that will not negate the existence of God in any way.No one that i am aware of has all the answers at this point regarding spiritual things, evolution or evilution there are areas God has not yet revealed to mankind but every day more is discovered.I find it amazing that God is big enough to share discovery even with those who would reject HGod in any way.No one that i am aware of has all the answers at this point regarding spiritual things, evolution or evilution there are areas God has not yet revealed to mankind but every day more is discovered.I find it amazing that God is big enough to share discovery even with those who would reject HGod has not yet revealed to mankind but every day more is discovered.I find it amazing that God is big enough to share discovery even with those who would reject HGod is big enough to share discovery even with those who would reject Him.
If Warfield is not concerned with Catholicism, then why in his discussion of the kind of «faith healing» promoted by men like A. J. Gordon does he claim that it creates a class of «professionals» who stand between the soul and God and that «from this germ the whole sacerdotal evil has grown»?
Before you suggested I either believed in your god or don't so why should I claim is an evil monster and therefore should not make comments about same, is that correct?
I think what he is trying to say is that believers claim that if atheists don't believe in God then why do they call God evil?
They don't claim to replace anyone, or be above anyone, Mormons teach that God will take the good to heaven and only the truly evil go to hell.
The central claim is made that moral evil... occurs because God — even though he is all - good and all - powerful — out of goodness decided to give freedom to human beings.
The implications for DP, for the origins of evil are clearest in Luther's claim that Satan is a «mask» of God.
I'm pointing out that the god that they claim exists is evil.
«Because the «Evil One» wants us to fail, there is a temptation to claim this territory as our own and guard it — not as a gift from God but as the work of our own hands».
It's the claim that sin / evil is guided by the Holy Spirit because God has determined absolutely everything.
The guy committed genocide more than once, and as evil as they claim Lucifer is, he doesn't even come close to the destruction caused by god.
For example, those who claim absolut determinism and say God also authors / causes the evil in this world for his glory.
First, Camus can not reconcile the fact of evil and suffering with the claim of God's goodness and omnipotence.
The power of individual influence can marginalize those who hold onto the evil of bigotry all while claiming to love God.
To claim fellowship with God and live an evil life will not do; the claim is false.
Insistently attentive to horrendous evils in the actual lives of persons, she boldly draws on both philosophical and theological resources (the two, she says, are inseparable) to support her claim that the person experiencing evil can reach the firm and reasonable conclusion that evil has not defeated the goodness of God.
You claim that if they are good then it's because of God's grace; if they aren't it's because they are evil.
It's often said that three claims of the Christian tradition — «God is omnipotent,» «God is love» and «Evil exists» — present a logical contradiction.
Atheists who claim to be experts only use parts of the bible that will support their agenda (god is evil and murderous) but won't tell the entire story.
Now this does not in any way say that works earn you a rightful place in heaven, but that many will claim to be saved, know of God but continue to be evil, or get saved just to save their butt and not because they truly love and honor Christ.
That just means it was written by greedy, evil men who got their way by claiming that god told them to do something.
OK... so in your mind God is evil because he grants us free will which is something you claim we all have because there is no God?
my husband is a professed Odinist I am... what I am I hate the terms and shit, a witch I say that proud and humbly with honor BC I am ashamed of the so called goth chicks that make false claims you are or your not as in odinism, now the All Father to me was God in their religion Baal is a nasty and dangerous evil nonhuman entity if Im wrong will you please show me your source, are you Wodenist or Odinist
To his criterion for discerning satanic «Christianity» we might add these: hostility toward those who are different; projecting evil on other who are then demonized; claiming doctrinal certitude; breeding psychic dependency, unconsciousness, stagnation, fear, guilt, or hatred; depicting God as a monster (as in ascribing the death of loved ones to God).
I love where he says «To his criterion for discerning satanic «Christianity» we might add these: hostility toward those who are different; projecting evil on other who are then demonized; claiming doctrinal certitude;... depicting God as a monster (as in ascribing the death of loved ones to God).»
Process theism, by relinquishing the claim that God could completely control the world in order to overcome the problem of present evil, can not have this traditional assurance about the future.
His accusers raised a large number of baseless and patently false accusations against Him, then felt that it was necessary to expel His evil from their midst, and they did all this in obedience to the command of God (so they claimed).
Claiming that [the Christian] god must exist due to «good» and «evil» being in balance for 10,000 years is as meaningless as me claiming Krishna must exist becuase the World's ying and yang have been in perfect balance for 13,700,000,00Claiming that [the Christian] god must exist due to «good» and «evil» being in balance for 10,000 years is as meaningless as me claiming Krishna must exist becuase the World's ying and yang have been in perfect balance for 13,700,000,00claiming Krishna must exist becuase the World's ying and yang have been in perfect balance for 13,700,000,000 years.
Only a fool would claim to solve the eternal philosophical «problem of evil» (why God allows suffering), but part of the explanation is that you and I could demonstrate faith.
First, Griffin doubts that FWTs who believe God possesses foreknowledge can also claim consistently that this world actually contains genuine evil.
Here there is no claim to privileged access to the ding an sich, for any such dichotomy between noumenal and phenomenal is absurd — what a thing is is known in, and consists of, what a thing does; or, in Christian terms, we know God in terms of His activity in the world, working towards communities or societies of shared good in spite of the recalcitrance, the back - waters, the negativities, or compendiously «the evil», with which he has to deal.
Mackie's challenge can now be formulated so: since there is no contradiction in the claim that God brings about a world devoid of evil, if God is Omnipotent, it is within his power to do so.
HawiiGuest I do not recall anything that would claim God created Evil.
Without casting Enlightenment rationalism as categorically evil, Wright details some of the problematic consequences of Enlightenment assumptions regarding the biblical text: false claims to absolute objectivity, the elevation of «reason» («not as an insistence that exegesis must make sense with an overall view of God and the wider world,» Wright notes, «but as a separate «source» in its own right»), reductive and skeptical readings of scripture that cast Christianity as out - of - date and irrelevant, a human - based eschatology that fosters a «we - know - better - now» attitude toward the text, a reframing of the problem of evil as a mere failure to be rational, the reduction of the act of God in Jesus Christ to a mere moral teacher, etc..
Hasker claims that the amount of intervention possible for God compatible with the divine purposes would surely be «far less than would be needed to materially affect the overall balance of good and evil in the world.»
We do not add any additional claim about our knowing that God in fact prevents all genuine evil.
Another claim made by Hasker is that if God were «routinely to intervene to prevent evil from being done, there would be far less incentive to form effective human communities, a large part of whose function is to encourage good behavior and to restrain evil.»
Defenders of classical theism often implicitly use the latter criterion, claiming they have defended their God's failure to prevent horrendous evils by simply pointing out that there might be some reason, knowable only by God, as to why it was good not to intervene.15 I would say, in any case, that it need not be «clear» in a strong sense of the term.
Human rule violated the prohibition and claimed the place of God, who knows good and evil.
The standard reply by defenders of traditional free will theism is that «worst» is a relative term so that, if God had prevented the worst evils, then the next worst evils would have been the worst, and the critic would claim that God should have prevented those, and so on, so that, in Hick's words, «There would be nowhere to stop, short of a divinely arranged paradise,» which would defeat the divine purpose of soul - making (363 - 64).
A second problem with Hasker's argument is that, although he claims that he is arguing that God should allow gratuitous evils, he is in fact arguing that even the gratuitous evils are not really gratuitous, because they contribute to «God's intention to make us responsible moral individuals,» which from his perspective is a more important consideration than the relative balance of enjoyment and suffering in the world.
Just in case his readers construe this as being a human function, Upadhyaya qualifies the extra-mundane character of this teaching: «Jesus Christ claims to have given to mankind the completest possible revelation of the nature and character of God, of the most comprehensive ideal of humanity, of the infinite malice of sin, and of the only universal way to release from the bondage of evil» (Ibid.)
If you believe that fooling a woman's system to avoid pregnancy is against your moral code then fine, we'll agree to disagree on the evils of foiling God's plan for every coupling to produce a child, but to claim the pill is abortion is just sad.
Its the same way people can protest outside funerals claiming AIDS and war death are God's punishment for sin: because the Horror of the delusion is not that «there is a God», but that «There is a God and he approved of my particular brand of hatred, intolerance and evil».
Claiming that evil exists in order to allow us free will is fine and dandy until you wake up and realize that the «evil» in Colorado that night was allowed to happen by the same God who would allow a baby bird to fall from a nest only to be picked apart by fire ants and maggots.
Unfortunately you do not understand the whole story because those who claim to represent god in our churches are evil men acting as gods servants.
This is directed against the Gnostics who claimed that they were in the most intimate possible fellowship with God, fellowship not even possible for the ordinary man, and who yet wallowed in sin, either on the principle that the body is evil and therefore it does not matter what is done with it or in it, or on the principle that in sin the body does no more than fulfil its own nature, and that in either case the spirit is left quite untouched.
God is not claiming to be the active creator of things evil, but as darkness is defined not in itself, but as absence of light.