Go back
gods children

gods children

Spirituality


why would god love us like his children? if we accept for the moment that god did create us, he did so with non of the circumstances that a human does. god did not love another being, he did not share the experience with loving partner or family. it was a solitary experience. he did not have to work hard for it, he had no craving for it, he had no chemicals telling him that it was what he needed to do. he did it in the blink of an eye, did he give it much thought even? why bother when you can blink them back out.
his link to us is manufactured, he designed it, he did not have it before and can make it disappear if he wishes. we are not gods children, you do not love something you have designed and made in the same way you love a child. we would die for our children, god would not die for us. we would not see pain in our children, god is invented pain and either enjoy seeing us in pain or is indifferent or seems to think it doesnt matter because the afterlife is worth it.
gods parenting style is to punish us until we learn a lesson, we have been put on the naughty step and not told how long for. these are old fashioned techniques that have been proven not to work and can easily lead to abuse.
a parent does not seek the adulation of their children, god is narcissistic, its all about him, why does he need our constant praise and worship.
god displays a disgusting amount of favoritism. most people in history have been overlooked by god, he has neither appeared to them, told them of his existence or sent an emissary. yet he showers his other children with attention, constantly aiding them and displaying his love. he behaves like and absent father.

we are not gods children, we if anything are gods toy.

2 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by stellspalfie
why would god love us like his children? if we accept for the moment that god did create us, he did so with non of the circumstances that a human does. god did not love another being, he did not share the experience with loving partner or family. it was a solitary experience. he did not have to work hard for it, he had no craving for it, he had no chemi ...[text shortened]... ve. he behaves like and absent father.

we are not gods children, we if anything are gods toy.
Whats your point?

By the way the Forum guidelines says :

Repeated posting of the same material (spamming) is not acceptable.

Overly trivial posts may be removed at the discretion of the forum moderators if they are deemed to be disruptive or distracting to the thread and its participants.

Do not rant. Ranting is defined here as a style of post that comes across as a political broadcast or an angry protest that does little to progress the discussion or to involve other posters. Such postings often feel like an intrusion into the general debate, regardless of the validity of the points being made.


You start the same nonsense, trivial, ranting threads over and over.

You have issues with God. Go see a shrink.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by stellspalfie
why would god love us like his children? if we accept for the moment that god did create us, he did so with non of the circumstances that a human does. god did not love another being, he did not share the experience with loving partner or family. it was a solitary experience. he did not have to work hard for it, he had no craving for it, he had no chemi ...[text shortened]... ve. he behaves like and absent father.

we are not gods children, we if anything are gods toy.
God would not die for us?

Oh, really?

Haven't been paying attention much, have you?

1 edit

Originally posted by Suzianne
God would not die for us?

Oh, really?

Haven't been paying attention much, have you?
doesnt count if you can bring yourself back to life 5 minutes later.

jesus playing at being dead belittles the human experience.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Rajk999
Whats your point?

[quote]By the way the Forum guidelines says :

[i]Repeated posting of the same material (spamming) is not acceptable.

Overly trivial posts may be removed at the discretion of the forum moderators if they are deemed to be disruptive or distracting to the thread and its participants.

Do not rant. Ranting is defined here as a style ...[text shortened]... nonsense, trivial, ranting threads over and over.

You have issues with God. Go see a shrink.
sorry to upset you there little man. may i point out that 90% of the threads on here are the same points being regurgitated. the usual debates by the same people bringing up the same topics and making the same points. will you be dropping them similar posts letting them know they are repeating themselves???

i have no issue with an imaginary being. i have an issue with the logic and lack of critical thinking applied to the character of god by christians.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by stellspalfie
sorry to upset you there little man. may i point out that 90% of the threads on here are the same points being regurgitated. the usual debates by the same people bringing up the same topics and making the same points. will you be dropping them similar posts letting them know they are repeating themselves???

i have no issue with an imaginary being. i ...[text shortened]... ssue with the logic and lack of critical thinking applied to the character of god by christians.
Exactly, go get some professional psychiatric help.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Rajk999
Exactly, go get some professional psychiatric help.
psychiatric help! why, what do you suspect is wrong in my head little fella?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Rajk999
Whats your point?

[quote]By the way the Forum guidelines says :

[i]Repeated posting of the same material (spamming) is not acceptable.

Overly trivial posts may be removed at the discretion of the forum moderators if they are deemed to be disruptive or distracting to the thread and its participants.

Do not rant. Ranting is defined here as a style ...[text shortened]... nonsense, trivial, ranting threads over and over.

You have issues with God. Go see a shrink.
Careful there, the mods may see the repitition of JC's name and tenets (but his overly used name (s) mainly ) as breaking the guidelines just the same way as you see stelpalfies, here.
Not that i think it was a very good op and similar to a lot of others.
He starting to sound a bit like joe 667, but hey, thats nothing compared to some of the idiotic christian rants on here 🙂 . Have a nice day on the beach

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Careful there, the mods may see the repitition of JC's name and tenets (but his overly used name (s) mainly ) as breaking the guidelines just the same way as you see stelpalfies, here.
Not that i think it was a very good op and similar to a lot of others.
He starting to sound a bit like joe 667, but hey, thats nothing compared to some of the idiotic christian rants on here 🙂 . Have a nice day on the beach
i may have posted something similar in the past im not sure to be honest. the little man must find something upsetting about the content of the post. either he finds the points i make upsetting or the quality of my writing upsetting. if it was the repetition of a point being covered over and over again, he would be making similar complaints to several other forum users. as he doesnt the only conclusion i can make is that ive touched a nerve and he finds it easier to whine like a little bureaucrat, calling up irrelevant forum rules to avoid dealing with the obvious logic that his god is a wnkr.

btw my op is damn good. only dishonest fools dont like it.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by stellspalfie
i may have posted something similar in the past im not sure to be honest. the little man must find something upsetting about the content of the post. either he finds the points i make upsetting or the quality of my writing upsetting. if it was the repetition of a point being covered over and over again, he would be making similar complaints to several o ...[text shortened]... ious logic that his god is a wnkr.

btw my op is damn good. only dishonest fools dont like it.
lol 🙂
your op's alright. whatever. It could've gone somewhere better though , dont you think?

Yeah, Rajk is a contentious bastard. Oh well, he makes for some interesting posting with a flavour all of its own.
I am neither for or against him. Although idealogically, i am prolly against a lot of his ideas