I don't claim to know anything, i'm just telling you that what we were taught does not make sense at all. If you want to keep criticizing me then please answer my question as to why Heaven did not change.
Were you not the one who said, "This is the first sin MENTIONED in the Bible but when you read that verse you posted
we know it isn't the first sin ever to take place. Satan simply fell because he sinned."
Didn't you say that in rejection of my postulating the notion that Lucifer's tempting of Adam and Eve was his act of rebellion, or at least the beginning of it?
Now you claim that it is merely "what we were taught" and that what we were taught doesn't make sense. Well, perhaps, to some degree I agree with that assessment. There's a very great deal about what "we were taught" that doesn't make sense and that isn't true.
The bible never suggested that Lucifer started when he tempted Adam, all verses have illustrated that he fell prior to being in the garden.
Really? Are you sure? Which verses have illustrated this?
Where did you get this answer that Satan only became evil when he tempted Adam?
I make it a practice to reject as false any idea that is not rational, what is left must be the truth.
And you should be more careful with the names. Lucifer is the name of the Arch Angel. Satan is what Lucifer is now called (i.e. after his fall from Heaven). It isn't entirely inaccurate to call Satan, Lucifer but it keeps things clearer if you make the distinction that Lucifer was good and Satan is bad.
First of all, If you are calling that question stupid and irrelevant yet thought that it's primarily about skin color then it's you who has the problem; you obviously did not want or could not understand that analogy.
I specifically asked you what skin color has to do with it. If it has something to do with it then explain it.
Skin color was not the point, and you didn't need to be told that.
Then why did you bring it up?
Remember, this is on the question on "how can we see God as a just god" with this specific theology.
Which has exactly nothing to do with a person's skin color! Why are you acting as though I'm the one who brought it up? You're the one who asked a question about a white kid, not me!
I answered your question simply with this question and the point was if it is ok to judge him or anybody (no matter what race) for the sins of his/her ancestors? You answered no.
And then you accused me of not answering the question! What are you on drugs? The whole thread is still here for all of us to read...
In response to my answering, "no", you responded...
"I never denied or spoke against people going to hell for their own faults,
what are you talking about here? You made this whole block of a post quoting bible verses and none of them are really on topic to my points. "
Well, I'm talking about my answer to your question, that's what!
Since no is your answer then why is it that we are condemned for the actions of Adam and Eve when we had nothing to do with what they did in the garden?
We aren't! That's why I posted the whole chapter of Ezekiel 18! You should read it. It is specifically talking about this exact topic.
The doctrine of original sin is a lie as is the most of the rest of Augustinian theology (better known as Catholicism or Calvinism).
Condemning us for what they did is like judging another person because his ancestors did crimes.
Precisely right. Did you even bother to read even one sentence of the passage I quoted?
You can't deny that we are not condemned/cursed because of that, we are all born with mortal sin, we all commit sin, we all die and we all needed a Savior.
I most certainly can deny it! God is just and Calvinism is a lie. I side with Ezekiel, not Calvin or Augustine.
It is true that we are all born with what is called a sin nature. The bible also calls this, "the flesh" but Christ's death took care of that issue for all mankind (Romans 5). No one will be sent to Hell or punished in any way by God for any sin other than that which he himself commits. So says an entire chapter of the book of Ezekiel.
The whole existence of Satan just makes God unjust. Simply because of what i've put.
How so? BY WHAT STANDARD?
1st problem of un-just is the main question i started with: Heaven not degrading like the earth
Had the angels been permitted to stay, it would have been. God is able to preserve His own heaven.
2nd problem the fact that we -the descendants- of Adam are condemned because of what he did.
This point has been refuted. What else have you got?
3rd for God to label/kick Satan out of heaven and yet love/die for mankind when mankind without a doubt has a greater track record of evil.
How do you know this? A greater track record of evil by what standard? Where in the bible are we told this?
Where did you learn the degree to which Satan's evil reached and by what standard did you compare that level to the level of man's evil to conclude that man's is worse?
That's like me labeling a random dude who just cursed and got mad at me as a pure criminal while the other guy who killed countless people is a greater person.
You do not know what you are talking about. You have no idea what Satan did nor the height from which he fell. His tempting of Adam and Eve alone out does anything the human race is capable of! He killed an entire race and made it so that God's own Life would need to be forfeit to salvage it.
You won't get this because you, just like millions, have gotten to use to "blame it or blame a bit of it on the devil".
I don't even understand what that means!
Because of these problems-these holes, i just think it makes more sense to dismiss the existence of this Fallen Angel and accept the fact that the possibility that our negative sides/ungodliness is what satan really is. Where in the bible does it state that satan was actually an angel anyway?
You know, if you are going to call yourself a Christian and then go spouting off about how unjust God is if Satan exists, you might want to read the bible to find out whether Satan actually exists before making something up off the top of your head to satisfy your own erroneous thought process!
Guess what? You don't get to decide whether or not Satan exists. He either does or he doesn't. Your personal opinions do not effect reality, nor does whether or not you like the implications. Your duty is to the truth, not to making up your own doctrine because you don't like someone else's.
The fact is this; either Satan exists or the bible is false.
That's how painfully obvious it is that the bible treats Satan as though he were a real person. You'd have to through out Genesis, I Chronicles, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Zechariah, Job, all three of the synoptic gospels and Revelation AT LEAST, perhaps more than that!
Rejecting the existence of Satan is simply not a rational option. If you insist on it then why bother reading the bible at all or calling yourself a Christian? Just go make something up and go with it!
OR you could understand one simple thing - contradiction do not exist! If you think you've found one, check your premises! You'll find that one of them is wrong. And this, to your credit, is basically what you've attempted, you just rejected the wrong premise and have unwhittingly thrown the baby out with the bathwater. What you got right is that God cannot be righteous (just) and act unjustly.
It is the premise of "original sin" that you need to reject, not the existence of Satan.
Resting in Him,
Clete
lain: If Satan doesn’t exist, he can’t change any angelic attitudes. :juggle:
