• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: Xorkoth | Madness

The God of the Bible loves us and is for us not against us: discuss

R

Ransom itch

Bluelighter
Joined
Sep 10, 2014
Messages
68
How, in today's world, does one defend the idea that the Creator of Heaven and earth as described in the Bible has a heart of compassion and love towards us His created ones? How would you argue for or against this idea?
 
Depends on who's doing the defining of what Love and compassion is.

The Bible shows God's many different faces.

It all depends on the interpreter.

Mainstream religion is based on specific, and exclusive interpretations of the Bible. These interpretations are often built and constructed to achieve some "personal" endeavor, that has absolutely nothing to do with God, but with control and power.

So I can't really answer this question, because it's absent of context.

The God of the Bible says he is everything and everyone.

He is both LOVE and HATE. Simultaneously.

I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things. Isaiah 45:7

What can exist outside of and be separate of Infinity?

Who is Love to say to Hate, "infinity isn't big enough for the both of us"?

We aren't just God's "created ones" we are God. All else is just illusion.

Another thing you have to understand is that, the Bible is just a compilation of a bunch of different individual texts and manuscripts. When these texts were written, they weren't written all at once or in consecutive order, and they were not designed or intended to be in conjunction with each other.
 
I'd begin with a God that created his 'chosen ones' and brags about he knows beginning from end and then puts them to a test he KNOWS they must fail, then punishes them for doing exactly what he knew would happen and THEN punishes everyone ever to be born for a crime committed by the original pair.

i.e. He ain't there for our benefit and the stories show a despotic, cruel and evil being who happily tells people to go kill, rape and pillage another people just because they don't worship Him.
 
Journyman16 said:
I'd begin with a God that created his 'chosen ones' and brags about he knows beginning from end and then puts them to a test he KNOWS they must fail, then punishes them for doing exactly what he knew would happen and THEN punishes everyone ever to be born for a crime committed by the original pair.

i.e. He ain't there for our benefit and the stories show a despotic, cruel and evil being who happily tells people to go kill, rape and pillage another people just because they don't worship Him.
Click to expand...

You sound like you're coming from the perspective of someone who is using an interpretation of the Bible that has been derived by mainstream religion.

Have you, yourself ever read the Bible? If you have, I'm assuming that when you read it, you treated it as if it were a whole, correct? As if all the individual texts that make up the Bible were written in conjunction with each other? If so, that's where you went wrong. Not only that, but there's a lot of, uh, how should I word this, occult metaphor and occult doctrine, that requires an occult understanding to be able to grasp it.
 
Oh I know about the bible - started life in a religion where they insisted the bible was literal - in fact my first 'what the...?' was over how much time they spent explaining and interpreting what the literal bible said. :D

I'm also well aware of the various astrological and precessional components to the various stories in there. I'm also reasonably read on some of the truths behind the supposed 'historic' events in there.

I was just answering the OP question...

Another good debate would be about the occult side of things, but clearly that's not what this thread is about.
 
satan loves you too ! embrace satans tutelage in my free e book :)

see how that works people write shit down and people read the shit ! and the people that are yearning for some ungainsayable truth usually find it in there own sense of interpretation!

Hey jesus i don't understand something will you make some shit up for us !
 
Ransom itch said:
How, in today's world, does one defend the idea that the Creator of Heaven and earth as described in the Bible has a heart of compassion and love towards us His created ones? How would you argue for or against this idea?
Click to expand...

I would have thought that the best way would be for gods earthly representatives to act with the qualities they claim to rest in god, to "live out their faith" here on Earth; but it seems many religions (as an institution) are unable to practise what they preach :\ This is, perhaps, organised religion's greatest enemy at the moment, plus the fact that humans like to record history. Looked at another way, you could say that the Abrahamic faiths have been practiced in exactly the violent manner of the old testament/Torah god.

There are several modern implications of biblical teaching, such as discrimination against homosexuality and opression of woman that emerge from the bible and that many modern Christians try to seperate from the teachings of god. I am unsure with what criteria some biblical teachings are interpreted as being 'incorrect' and others being, literally, 'divine', but if the bible is interpreted literally, from that we can infer that the Christian/jewish god is deeply non-compassionate and unloving.
 
Willow11 says
I would have thought that the best way would be for gods earthly representatives to act with the qualities they claim to rest in god, to "live out their faith" here on Earth; but it seems many religions (as an institution) are unable to practise what they preach
Click to expand...

Good observation but what sadly gets overlooked are the many thousands even millions of people who truly do endeavour to live out the love of God in their local communities.
 
silas GUY said:
satan loves you too ! embrace satans tutelage in my free e book :)
Click to expand...

Indeed, this is a good point. Go watch "Satan's Children" on Youtube for some inspiration. It shows well how getting into that kind of thing isn't so glamorous (if you can think at all, it's supposed to have the other effect).

It must be great to be a member of a group who will turn on you like wild beasts on a whim. At the end there is only the leader left, and finally someone will be strong enough to destroy him too.

But this is the kind of "Survival of the fittest" program many still run on. And they're so mindless there is no way to reason with them.
 
I'm certainly no exprt on such tings but from what I have learned there is a great deal of difference between true Luciferian and Satanism - remember Lucifer is the 'Bringer of Light, plus he was supposed to be the one who took us out of 'innocence' and into reality. If we read Geneisis carefully it seems clear God had us in a state where we didn't even know right from wrong - interestingly the first time there was such a choice to be made we got punished for it, even though, BEFORE WE MADE THE CHOICE we couldn't possibly know the meaning of the choice.

We were pretty much talking animals, created solely for God as pets. Lucifer gave us Humanity, gave us a leg up towards godhood - remember God was scared we'd eat of the Tree of Everlasting Life and be 'just like us' and so kicked us out of the garden. I think Lucifer has been getting a whole lot of bad press, from, who else? God.

The whole Luciferian revolt reads more like an attempted Palace Coup than an upstart creation trying to be God - after all Lucifer had legions of angels join him in the attempt. There are even hints that Lucifer may have been in charge, lost the battle and Jehovah replaced him and rewrote the history.

But Satan is, in his current form, a creation of Christianity. Banished to the Solid, Jehovah still sought counsel with Lucifer and had bets with him. (the Job story) Sons of Jehovah came to Lucifer's domain and screwed human women to make the Nephilim.

This is all a much more complex story that the Religions tell us and Satanism is not about the Devil or Lucifer. That's just the religious version of the MSM spinning a story, just like Hell is a recent creation to keep us all behaving well and like the reincarnation info was stripped from the bible in the 2nd Synod - can't have the peasants thinking they might be Pope next time or that the Pope might be one of them - kinda removes the 'God put me here to rule' story.

I think the Satanists are following something that has little to do with Lucifer, no matter what they believe. Perhaps what they chase (Baphomet, Ba'al etc) has more to do with the legends of how the previous civilisation met its doom - chasing power from a source you can't control...
 
You're getting it a bit mixed up. Lucifer the angel wanted to give us free will, and that kind of went to hell, but he had good intentions. Devil worshippers worship what they call "Satanic and Luciferian forces", which is something different.

It seems like the name "Lucifer" was just stolen to lend some glamour to it. People sincerely believe it's the name of a dark force, though.

But they're not worshipping a fallen angel, they're worshipping the most primitive, survival-driven forces of nature. The "Bahopmet" is a sigil representing the dark force in the Earth. It's what holds humanity back and we're tricked into worhipping that.

It's mostly survival-driven, like if you hit out and kill someone in self-defence. It's no more romantic than that. So it's another version of biology's "Survival of the fittest".

It's the anti-thesis of spirutuality.
 
Last edited:
The name "Lucifer" is so complex there's almost no point in bringing it up, but it seems like it was used to give some beauty and romance to something very ugly and Earthbound.

A better name for it would be "The beast within" as that's basically what it is (I don't remember who, but someone has a song called "The beast within remix").

Call me crazy, but I wouldn't like to be standing in a circle, digging my own grave while people are throwing stones at me, before they bury me alive and set fire to my head.
 
And yet, the throwing stones and burning alive comes from the Church...

My impression is that rather than " it seems like it was used to give some beauty and romance to something very ugly and Earthbound" I'd go for " it seems like it was used to give something very ugly and Earthbound to something of beauty and romance."

We think of Lucifer from the view of God... or the view of the people who think of God as ultimate. But the STORY suggests a different view. From a Human view, Lucifer may be seen as being disgusted at what God made of us, mind-dead pets to stroke his ego even though according to God's story we are capable of so much more. Lucifer brought us that. God forbade it and punished us when we found it anyway.

Stand back from the beliefs and picture it as a genetics lab where somebody creates perfect slaves - they are just like us but their minds are not awake and we set them to die after 12 months. Now... would YOU find a way to set them free of their enslavement so they could be real humans? Or would you sit back and let them peel grapes and lick your feet clean?

What if Lucifer made us but then the war came and he lost, and Jehovah wanted us as His pets... but Lucifer found a way to meet with us and awaken our potential like he always planned for us to be. What if the project of making us was what distracted Lucifer enough that Jehovah could mount his palace coup?

To me, that kind of scenario makes a lot more sense than the one we are being fed...
 
The expectation is that God is compassionate.

People want to believe that God loves them.

That's why Jesus is so popular.

Because God is literally a man with human problems, rather than an unimaginably vast undefinable infinite consciousness.

If God exists, and we are a tiny part of some divine creation, then God is neither for us or against us.

We have a tendency to anthropomorphize God.

But, God is not human.

And there is no reason to assume that God favors man.
 
The history of arguing the case for and against God spans millennia and we always think that it is our generation right here and now that has the most comprehensive, watertight and up-to-date arguments to bolster our positions. Yet, there is nothing new under the sun. Whatever argument is being posited on this forum has been before and will no doubt be posited again and presented as some new insight. Generally though, I believe our arguments for or against the God of the Bible are shaped by how we, as primarily selfish beings, want to live our lives on this earth.

What I have realised since I became a Christian 25 years ago, is that as time passes, I actually know less and less each day. Yet of this one thing I am sure, the assurance of Gods personal love for me and the change His Holy Spirit has brought about in my life, in my heart and in my attitudes can only be described as miraculous. I.e. there is no earthly power to which I can point that could satisfactorily account for this change in me, or account for the deep assurance I have that I am not a meaningless speck in a random universe but that I am known and loved by a magnificent Creator God. And as methmaniac said earlier, all I did was accept that Jesus death on the cross was the penalty He unjustly took in exchange for my sins! Meth also said it was quite easy really. I would argue that it was not easy at all and that the battle to acede my will and my life and put them into the Hands of Another was perhaps the biggest battle I ever faced in my life. Pride, self-determination and a deep mistrust of anybody but myself being able to lead my life were the principle arguments and strongholds in my mind, before I finally bowed the knee to the Will of Jesus. And amen that I did!
 
Last edited:
What I have realised since I became a Christian 25 years ago, is that as time passes, I actually know less and less each day.
Click to expand...
:D Specifically NOT saying anything about this quote... :D

The change that comes from making such decisions has, IMO, little to do with anything outside one's self. Sometimes just finding a place to 'stand' gives us more power to deal with things. It can be confusing to not know things, to not even know which choices are valid, and to see the world is uncontrollable for an individual. So finding a place to anchor can be a powerful tool and gives us a direction to view the world from.

Unfortunately, it also leaves us open to manipulation if the 'rock' top which we anchor is attached to someone else rather than firmly embedded in a reality. When that someone else moves, so do we. When that someone else tells us that all is lost unless we... (whatever) then we kind of have to do it or lose our hard-won stability.

I'm just not sure stability is a good thing for a human. IMO that 'stability' and the desire for it is because we are incorrectly positioned to live a life by our upbringing and our schooling. Schools are to program good little consumers, and when needed, nice obedient cannon fodder, and to populate a society with people who all think alike, or at least within very proscribed boundaries of the same views.

It makes us easier to predict and manipulate.

We are deliberately not given knowledge of what makes a human. We don't even get knowledge of how the money system works, ensuring very few ever get ahead enough to move in the ultra-rich cicles unless they are born into it. That's why most of the ultra-rich families intermarry - they do not want someone from the lower ranks suddenly getting access to the knowledge they grow up with and maybe sharing it around.

After all, it is impossible for ANYONE to be rich (or ultra-rich) unless many someone's at the bottom of the pyramids are NOT being paid true value for their work.

Choosing to know by believing is, again IMO, not a good way to sort the issues of complexity that life throws at us. Better is to learn more effective ways to view things; learn to see the basics instead of filtering what can be known.

Not attacking, OK? Just the view of someone who 'found Jesus' as a child and then grew out of it.
 
Yhwh is not an all loving deity. He's a very moody one, depending on how you supplicate yourself to him and conduct your ritual affairs. This has also been conflated with the politics of the Bible, so much so that only people who work directly with ywhw know his true personality. I really believe that the first Christians were cultists, based on the earliest accounts. They worshiped an obscure god that the rest of the world at that time didn't know about or actually frowned upon. They just borrowed the god from the Jews and repurposed it, but kept most of the ritual workings in tact until the Middle Ages when it was heavily adulterated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top