Originally posted by DeadBeSwallowedGod is not punishing you, because God does not exist.
To make a long story short, I feel good is punishing me. I've had an awful life and awful set of coincidences that can only be explained by god and done by god himself, if there is such a being to begin with, and we all know you religious nuts beleive in the supernatural rather then a lot of random terrible events, so in your eyes, I must conclude, ...[text shortened]... eated better then me, so I must of did something worse then that in the eyes of god, what is it?
You need to pull yourself together, or seek help from a professional person who can help you get your life back on track.
Originally posted by DeadBeSwallowedHi DeadBeSwallowed.
To make a long story short, I feel good is punishing me. I've had an awful life and awful set of coincidences that can only be explained by god and done by god himself, if there is such a being to begin with, and we all know you religious nuts beleive in the supernatural rather then a lot of random terrible events, so in your eyes, I must conclude, ...[text shortened]... eated better then me, so I must of did something worse then that in the eyes of god, what is it?
I know this is an old cliché but it is a very good one, and one for you particually. 'You make your own luck in this world.'
To think such negative thoughts all the time does you know good at all. And believe, I know.
Firstly you say "....and we all know you religious nuts beleive in the supernatural rather then a lot of random terrible events, so in your eyes, I must conclude, that god is punishing me...." Why on earth would god be punishing you? Have you done something so bad? Anyway doesn't god pat everyone on the head when we get to heaven and forgive us all our sins? So what the hell are you worrying about?
I don't believe in god but he's not having a pop at me. There is a VERY GOOD COMMERCIAL ON ITV AT THE MOMENT. It is for the National Lottery. Two women walking along the street. One with big smile on her face.They pass two kids and the miserable one gets a red blob on their cardigan, the other woman doesn't. Then the miserable one walks past a hanging basket and gets wet. The other woman spots a £1 coin on the ground and bends down to pick it up. She then notices that a shop is selling the Lottery scratchcards and walks into the shop. The other woman stands outside and as the shop door closes it catches the skirt of the miserable woman, tearing it off her. At that moment a bus passes her and drenches her with dirty water from a huge puddle.
Okay this is a TV commercial and a very good one.
Thinking necative thoughts all the time brings on depression. You won't meet anyone if you're miserable. Who wants to sit and chat to someone with a long face? (Other than a horse!) You have to think positive. Be positive in the things you say, the things you do and hey, you'll soon start feeling a lot better about your life.
Focus not on the things you don't have - rather on the things you do have.
So come on, chin up, and stop feeling so sorry for yourself and try to be positive this afternoon. You will feel better I promise you. If you believe in god, thank him for the things you have rather than what you don't have. Some would say that by having your faith you have a huge bonus over us who don't.
Remember, Smile and the world smiles with you, cry and you cry alone.
Originally posted by no1marauderI thought you might take that road. But that isn't the point of the analogy.
Yes many of them, but we didn't pretend that any of their letters were equal in authority to the pronouncements of the US Supreme Court. And we wouldn't have taken their word for it if they said so.
You asked whether Jesus was so vague that we needed Paul to explain it to us. I would ask the same of you - are the Constitution and judgments of the Supreme Court so vague that you needed a Professor to explain it to you? If you were a student of medicine, I would ask whether it is so unclear what the organs of the human body do that you need a Professor or textbook to explain it to you?
Since you bring up the issue of authority (so far, we've only looked at the necessity of pedagogy), I will use a slightly different analogy (but still from the world of law):
Why do we need the Supreme Court? Why not leave every citizen to interpret the Constitution as he sees fit?
Originally posted by DeadBeSwallowedHow do you know it is God's punishment and not you simlpy reaping
To make a long story short, I feel good is punishing me. I've had an awful life and awful set of coincidences that can only be explained by god and done by god himself, if there is such a being to begin with, and we all know you religious nuts beleive in the supernatural rather then a lot of random terrible events, so in your eyes, I must conclude, ...[text shortened]... eated better then me, so I must of did something worse then that in the eyes of god, what is it?
what you have sown with your life. As I read scripture when God does
punish, there is little doubt about it.
Kelly
Originally posted by lucifershammerThe Spirituality Forum is a waste of space; if you really can't figure out the answers to your ridiculous questions or can't see why your analogy is flawed, start a thread in Debates. A quick answer would be that the Constitution was adopted by the people and they consented to the authority of the Supreme Court. However, those who believe in the Bible have elevated Paul's words, a self-appointed prophet, to equality with those of God's. This is, in a word, crazy.
I thought you might take that road. But that isn't the point of the analogy.
You asked whether Jesus was so vague that we needed Paul to explain it to us. I would ask the same of you - are the Constitution and judgments of the Supreme Court so vague that you needed a Professor to explain it to you? If you were a student of medicine, I would ask wh ...[text shortened]... eed the Supreme Court? Why not leave every citizen to interpret the Constitution as he sees fit?
Originally posted by lucifershammerWhy are you equating lawyers with Christ? Christ's Kingdom is not of this world, the US Constitution however,is.
I thought you might take that road. But that isn't the point of the analogy.
You asked whether Jesus was so vague that we needed Paul to explain it to us. I would ask the same of you - are the Constitution and judgments of the Supreme Court so vague that you needed a Professor to explain it to you? If you were a student of medicine, I would ask wh ...[text shortened]... eed the Supreme Court? Why not leave every citizen to interpret the Constitution as he sees fit?
Originally posted by DeadBeSwallowedIt's probably all in the attitude. God says not to be wrapped up in worldly possesions, but gain your wealth in heaven. Obviously you define a good life as "having stuff." With that attitude, nobody is punishing you except yourself.
Well, for one thing, they at least lived the high life until they got arrested, usually they have way more money then me, and have a lot of sex, I never get sex, because women never have sex with a guy with no money, and to be honest, some of those jails look better then a lot of my former living conditions. They definately get shunned by society less then me, shunned badly still the same, but I am shunned worse.
Originally posted by no1marauder
The Spirituality Forum is a waste of space
Then why respond? No one is forcing you to. 🙂
A quick answer would be that the Constitution was adopted by the people and they consented to the authority of the Supreme Court. However, those who believe in the Bible have elevated Paul's words, a self-appointed prophet, to equality with those of God's. This is, in a word, crazy.
That people consented to the authority of the Supreme Court is not an answer to why they needed a Supreme Court in the first place. This was the question I asked:
Why do we need the Supreme Court? Why not leave every citizen to interpret the Constitution as he sees fit?
Originally posted by lucifershammerThat people consented to the authority of the Supreme Court is not an answer to why they needed a Supreme Court in the first place.
Originally posted by no1marauder
[b]The Spirituality Forum is a waste of space
Then why respond? No one is forcing you to. 🙂
A quick answer would be that the Constitution was adopted by the people and they consented to the authority of the Supreme Court. However, those who believe in the Bible have elevated Paul's words, a self- ...[text shortened]... the Supreme Court? Why not leave every citizen to interpret the Constitution as he sees fit?[/b]
Yes it is. They didn't "need" it at all; they decided it would be useful. Are you saying that Christians decided to treat Paul's word as equal authority to God's because they find it "useful"? How so?
Originally posted by no1marauderOriginally posted by no1marauder
That people consented to the authority of the Supreme Court is not an answer to why they needed a Supreme Court in the first place.
Yes it is. They didn't "need" it at all; they decided it would be useful. Are you saying that Christians decided to treat Paul's word as equal authority to God's because they find it "useful"? How so?
Yes it is.
I'm afraid it isn't. No more than the answer to why people need a Constitution (or laws) is that they consented to it. In any case, you do address the question in the following sentence, so I'll let it slide.
They didn't "need" it at all; they decided it would be useful.
Why did they think it would be useful?
Also, is it your assertion that the United States would be just fine with a written Constitution but without a Supreme Court?
Are you saying that Christians decided to treat Paul's word as equal authority to God's because they find it "useful"? How so?
Haven't you heard?
"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness" (2 Tim 3:16) 🙂
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderOriginally posted by no1marauder
That people consented to the authority of the Supreme Court is not an answer to why they needed a Supreme Court in the first place.
Yes it is. They didn't "need" it at all; they decided it would be useful. A ...[text shortened]... equal authority to God's because they find it "useful"? How so?
Yes it is.
I'm afraid it isn't. No more than the answer to why people need a Constitution (or laws) is that they consented to it. In any case, you do address the question in the following sentence, so I'll let it slide.
They didn't "need" it at all; they decided it would be useful.
Why did they think it would be useful?
Also, is it your assertion that the United States would be just fine with a written Constitution but without a Supreme Court?
Are you saying that Christians decided to treat Paul's word as equal authority to God's because they find it "useful"? How so?
Haven't you heard?
"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness" (2 Tim 3:16) 🙂
Christian's decided to treat Paul's words as equal authority to God's because they were Inspired by the Holy Spirit; i.e. vested with the authority of God and effectively the Word of God.
Originally posted by lucifershammerOf what possible difference to this topic does it make WHY the people who wrote and ratified the Constitution thought a Supreme Court would be useful? The point is they made the Supreme Court the ultimate authority on what the Constitution means. Not my law professors.
Originally posted by no1marauder
[b]Yes it is.
I'm afraid it isn't. No more than the answer to why people need a Constitution (or laws) is that they consented to it. In any case, you do address the question in the following sentence, so I'll let it slide.
They didn't "need" it at all; they decided it would be useful.
...[text shortened]... and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness" (2 Tim 3:16) 🙂[/b]
Obviously, if someone believes in a Supreme Diety and further believes that said Supreme Deity walked on Earth and preached, his words must logically be the ultimate authority. That idea that some other individual word's would be held equal in importance to God's is absurd. Th fact that he said he was speaking with God's authority is no more convincing as proof then if Professor Moriarty (actual law school professor) said his words were just as authoritative as the US Supreme Court.
Please respond on topic this time.
Originally posted by lucifershammerYou are equating Jesus with the US Supreme Court and Paul to a Law Professor.
I am not "equating" anything. I am using an analogy. For more on the subject, refer St. Thomas Aquinas in the Summa Theologica (I, Q.13. Article 5).
AND also equating a right to make one's own a religious interpretation with some postulated right to make personal legal determinations.
None of your "analogy" has any merit whatsoever.