Biblical Use of Blood - Was it All About Food?

A_Son_of_God

Forum Reasoner - Nemesis of the Trolls
Joined
Feb 25, 2023
Messages
339
Reaction score
94
Some have come forward, and amongst other things, claimed that the Biblical terms of use of blood only refer to eating it.

So in this post, I will address some scriptural reasoning as to how blood is viewed by God, and what he states to all of us who claim to be his followers. Note: This is to those who wish to please God, and has no bearing on those who choose not to. What each one does is their own business.

You will benefit by looking up the scriptures yourself in your own copy of a bible. Additionally, most of the information is available in the publication "Insight on the Scriptures", under the heading "Blood". It is available online for you to look at should you choose. But I have written this article due to the claim being raised in the room by some.

First Account
The first mention of blood, at least directly mentioned, was when Cain killed his brother Abel, where God stated that Abel's blood "cried out" to him (Genesis 4:10). The killing of Abel - the spilling of his blood - brought a curse to Cain, and he lived out his remaining years as a wanderer and a fugitive, driven away from society. His bloodline appears to disappear at the time of the flood.

Noah
By the time of Noah, mankind had become so wicked that God had deemed them fit for destruction. Most likely due to the changes in the earth's environment, Noah was permitted to eat meat after the flood (Genesis 9:3-6), whereas prior to this, he was to eat only vegetation from seed-bearing plants (Genesis 1:29, Genesis 2:16-17).

Moses and the Law Covenant
In the time of Moses, specific laws were given to the Israelites regarding the use of blood. This included the eating of blood in food, but also the value of blood, and that it was viewed as sacred by God, and misuse of it was viewed as "defiling the earth" (Numbers 35:33), which this context shows the "pollution" that defiles was the blood spilt by both deliberate and accidental deaths. That is how careful the Israelite had to view the blood - which God views as where "the soul" of physical lives are. If he accidentally killed someone, he was still bloodguilty, and thereby accountable to the avenger of blood. At that stage, it was the nearest male relative who was the legal avenger of blood. The person who murdered had no hope of surviving the ordeal, as they were handed over to the avenger of blood. The accidental manslayer had to flee to one of the cities of refuge, and stay there until the high priest died.
Also, if a person was FOUND dead, bloodguilt was placed on the nearest city, and specific things had to be done to release the city from the spilling of innocent blood (Deuteronomy 21:1-9).

Separate to manslaughter and murder, blood was used only for sacrificial reasons (Leviticus 17:10-11), which demonstrated to the Israelites that blood removed sins. In other words, they were all worthy of death, as they had all sinned, and it cost them dearly - namely by having to have lives lost. People sometimes balk at the idea of sacrificing animals, but consider this: If mankind had not sinned - chosen a path that did not meet God's standards, and led to death - no animals would have had to die at all. Mankind's sins have affected every single thing on this earth. But anyway, God commanded that things were "cleansed" by blood, setting a pattern that in time would be demonstrated by what the Messiah provided for mankind. There were specific laws as to WHO could offer up the sacrifices, and HOW it was to be done (Leviticus 17:3-4), let alone the what, when and where. If these were sacrificed out of harmony with the way God had instructed his covenant people, they would be liable to harsh penalties. This was the agreement they made with God, and God in turn expected them to live up to it.

So far, you can see that blood was viewed as sacred in God's eyes, and the misuse of it had serious consequences. In fact, looking at Leviticus 17:3-4, we can see that people could be viewed as bloodguilty - not for eating blood - but for not presenting the animal for atonement (which involved the spilling of blood), the person was viewed as bloodguilty, and would pay for it with their lives. So this law on blood was not only about EATING blood, but for the misuse of it from the way God required.

Jesus, and the Christian Congregation
So what about Jesus' teachings? Did they touch on blood? And what of the teachings of the apostles in the first century?
Firstly, Jesus was a Jew. He followed the Law Code, but being the Messiah, he presented his very life as the sacrifice for us. His blood was spilt, and being sinless, he was entitled to have his human life given back to him. Instead though, he paid the price that Adam had sold us under. Namely, a perfect (perfect meaning exactly fit for the purpose it was made for) man who chose to sell ALL his children under the curse of sickness and death, by being bought by a perfect man, who paid for the blood that us humans just could never achieve, as there is no ability for any of us to be perfect, even from birth. We inherit sin just like we inherit genetic traits from our ancestors.

But what about this blood thing? Were the teachings of Jesus and the apostles specifically talking about eating blood?

Well, we can see Jesus use a figurative sense of "eating blood" to throw off those who weren't genuinely seeking understanding, when he said, "Whoever does not eat of my flesh and drink of my blood..." (John 6:44-61) So, yes, there was a specific mention of eating of blood, although in a figurative sense. Jesus was not condoning cannibalism, but used a metaphor to sift people.

But also, it is important to note that the Christian section of the Bible - the Christian Greek Scriptures, or the "New Testament" as it is commonly known - was in harmony with the Hebrew section of the Bible, with the only difference being in that Messiah had come, and covenants had changed. For instance, look at how Hebrews 10:1-4 shows the link between Christ's flesh and blood sacrifice, and that of the Mosaic Law, regarding animal sacrifices. There was no change in the point of view of the sanctity of blood, nor of its sacrificial value. In fact, it was more greatly emphasised, in that Jesus' blood actually paid the price for our inherited sins (Hebrews 12:24).

What About The Account In Acts?
In chapter 15 of Acts, it states clearly to "...abstain...from blood...". Yet some claim that this is to do specifically with "eating" of it. But when we examine the context, it does include the eating of it, but not exclusively. The whole chapter describes an issue, where the Jewish Christian congregations - or at least some from it - were trying to enforce circumcision on non-Jewish Christians, who had been receiving the holy spirit even though they were uncircumcised, and ate things like pork, and had married people from nations that may have been formerly opposed to the Israelites.

So let's look at it. This is what it says at Acts 15:28-29:

"For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you except these necessary things:

to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols,

from blood,

from what is strangled,

and from sexual immorality.

If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!”
Looking at this, we can see that the instruction certainly does include the EATING of blood. But is this all?
Well, as much as meat being sacrificed to idols MAY include the eating of blood, the emphasis is not on eating at all, but on the idolatry.
Additionally, "sexual immorality" certainly has nothing to do with eating blood.
Because the ending has "Good health to you!", some try to reason that it must be about food too, but to say that and not to think that sexual immorality can cause bad health consequences is playing ignorant on some very serious facts.

Some may say "Yeah, but I did it to save a life" or "But I enjoy eating black pudding". That's all fine and good. You are free to do as you please. The point is this: The Bible's law on blood is not exclusive to eating of it, but is to do with the sacred nature of how God views blood, and how those of us who want to please God should be aware of, so we can change to HIS standards, and not change HIS standards to OUR standards. Not all want to please God, nor even acknowledge him. That's fine for them. Good for them. But for those who wish to please God, we have these laws and principles to apply.

We've all sinned, and the extent of God's mercy is profound. God is so merciful that any of us - even those who have turned away from practices that take even human lives can stand before God as forgiven, based on the sanctity of Jesus' blood he poured out for us. But this is by being obedient to God's instructions, using HIS provisions, and ensuring that the works are dead works (Hebrews 9:12-15).
 
Last edited:

Kev45

A beautiful sunset that was mistaken for a dawn.
Joined
Nov 2, 2022
Messages
738
Reaction score
530
Brilliant, so you're damned if you live a good decent life but enjoy a tasty black pudding with your full English. Pop next door and savagely murder your neighbours and their children, repent and beg forgiveness, and all is good in God's eyes.

Which is exactly why here in the UK and all over the advanced world Christianity is dying a slow long-drawn-out death and the only place where it does see any growth is in the impoverished 3rd world. :rolleyes:
 

A_Son_of_God

Forum Reasoner - Nemesis of the Trolls
Joined
Feb 25, 2023
Messages
339
Reaction score
94
Brilliant, so you're damned if you live a good decent life but enjoy a tasty black pudding with your full English. Pop next door and savagely murder your neighbours and their children, repent and beg forgiveness, and all is good in God's eyes.

Which is exactly why here in the UK and all over the advanced world Christianity is dying a slow long-drawn-out death and the only place where it does see any growth is in the impoverished 3rd world. :rolleyes:
Can you explain your conclusion there? It would be appreciated, as your point about "damnation" seems to be opposite to what the article shows, as well as the repenting bit. It appears you're strawmanning.

Additionally, a person doesn't need to actually murder someone to be bloodguilty of their murder. It could be for instance in their support of murderous activity. Unrepentant criminals will be removed permanently, bringing world peace to all creation. Great times ahead.
 
Last edited:

Kev45

A beautiful sunset that was mistaken for a dawn.
Joined
Nov 2, 2022
Messages
738
Reaction score
530
Can you explain your conclusion there? It would be appreciated, as your point about "damnation" seems to be opposite to what the article shows, as well as the repenting bit. It appears you're strawmanning.

Additionally, a person doesn't need to actually murder someone to be bloodguilty of their murder. It could be for instance in their support of murderous activity. Unrepentant criminals will be removed permanently, bringing world peace to all creation. Great times ahead.

No, I do apologize, but I didn't read it in full, except the last two paragraphs, black pudding hell and damnation, and solely because you didn't provide any sources other than what you claim are quotes from one of the many different religious texts in circulation.

In general, I really don't take much notice anyway when meat eating religious extremists, who would deny a blood transfusion for a child who would die otherwise, preach about consuming blood yet still eat meat containing blood.

For example, my local Vicar enjoys a full English and will happily explain his theological stance without resorting to veiled threats about the consequences of not obeying God's word. :rolleyes:
 

A_Son_of_God

Forum Reasoner - Nemesis of the Trolls
Joined
Feb 25, 2023
Messages
339
Reaction score
94
No, I do apologize, but I didn't read it in full, except the last two paragraphs, black pudding hell and damnation,
There was no mention of hell nor damnation.
and solely because you didn't provide any sources other than what you claim are quotes from one of the many different religious texts in circulation.
The word "Bible" refers to...the Bible. You'd have seen it if you'd read the first and third sentences/paragraphs.
In general, I really don't take much notice anyway when meat eating religious extremists, who would deny a blood transfusion for a child who would die otherwise, preach about consuming blood yet still eat meat containing blood.
Then why did you bother commenting on something you claim you're not interested in? This again shows you didn't read it, as it states very clearly that it is not for those who do not wish to please God. If you choose to use blood your OWN way, good for you! I hope you have enough so you can eat it 24 hours a day, for as many days as you have left alive. That isn't my business. Still, it is you who seems confused about the difference between eating blood and eating meat which you claim still contains blood. I don't have such a problem. You do though, but you choose not to ask, but to instead attack anyone who possibly could give you an answer to your understanding.

There are much healthier, higher quality ways of helping a child instead of giving them a blood transfusion. You could look for yourself if you so chose to.
For example, my local Vicar enjoys a full English and will happily explain his theological stance without resorting to veiled threats about the consequences of not obeying God's word. :rolleyes:
His theological stance? Sad. So not God's point of view, but his.The majority of vicars, or some other name of some "leader" of a religion who claim "Christianity" are happy to put their own points of view forward, including nationalism, over God's laws on the sanctity of blood. It is also common for them to run boxing gyms, martial arts dojos, and even providing place for other unscriptural practices that spill blood. I'm not surprised that he'd be happy to not do his Christian obligation of teaching the truth about Christ and God. This has been demonstrated in the world wars of last century, and even conflicts that abound today. In fact, the reaction to why the churches didn't act in the days of the second world war is the reason why what you call "advanced" nations leave false "Christianity". True Christianity is still growing in lands such as UK, US, and many other places that you are unaware of. It will continue to grow, but will always be a minority. Christ warned us of such things, when he said that the broad road leads off into destruction, and how narrow the gate and cramped the path leading off into life was.The majority only want to hear what they want to hear, and not God's thoughts on things.

The article was on the sanctity and correct use of blood, and I'm grateful for your input.

As for your "veiled" claims, it is you who claim things for the sake of purely attacking what is good with your inaccurate statements. Your veiled trolling. Not veiled threats. It is you who even now admitted to not reading it in full, yet then you still defend your stance which is off-topic, and not a debateable point about the topic at all, but a tangential distraction. No need for threats, as God will administer justice in good time.

But still, what God states will come to be, and it is HIS perspectives of right and wrong are what matter, not yours, nor mine even for that matter.
 

Kev45

A beautiful sunset that was mistaken for a dawn.
Joined
Nov 2, 2022
Messages
738
Reaction score
530
seems to be opposite to what the article shows

You have plagiarized someone else's body of work, and passed it off as your own, then run off on a tangent about strawman to deflect.

Post a link to the original article.
 

A_Son_of_God

Forum Reasoner - Nemesis of the Trolls
Joined
Feb 25, 2023
Messages
339
Reaction score
94
You have plagiarized someone else's body of work, and passed it off as your own, then run off on a tangent about strawman to deflect.

Post a link to the original article.
No. Because I used an article does not mean I plagiarised it. You do your homework and type the words into a search engine and look for yourself.

There is no deflection by saying you strawman. But I will instead start a new thread of an article about you strawmanning. Thank you.
 

Kev45

A beautiful sunset that was mistaken for a dawn.
Joined
Nov 2, 2022
Messages
738
Reaction score
530
No. Because I used an article does not mean I plagiarised it. You do your homework and type the words into a search engine and look for yourself.

There is no deflection by saying you strawman. But I will instead start a new thread of an article about you strawmanning. Thank you.

Ha Ha Ha.

I rest my case, thieving other people's work and deceitfully passing it off as your own, is just not very Christian, is it. :)
 

Kev45

A beautiful sunset that was mistaken for a dawn.
Joined
Nov 2, 2022
Messages
738
Reaction score
530

A_Son_of_God

Forum Reasoner - Nemesis of the Trolls
Joined
Feb 25, 2023
Messages
339
Reaction score
94
Ha Ha Ha.

I rest my case, thieving other people's work and deceitfully passing it off as your own, is just not very Christian, is it. :)
The information in the article speaks for itself, Senor Expert. Thank you for donating your thinking to the subject matter, although once again, you have missed the theme. The topic was "Biblical Use of Blood - Was it All About Food?" I apologise that your focus level is very limited, and suggest gingko biloba and mentholated foods, like rosemary, mint, etc. But see a doctor first. Maybe one day you'll be able to follow themes and present arguments in a manner worthy of debate.
 

Kev45

A beautiful sunset that was mistaken for a dawn.
Joined
Nov 2, 2022
Messages
738
Reaction score
530
I'll interpret your stolen, plagiarized views, how I so choose, and whether you like it or not.

Now post a link to the original article, so I can judge the article in full context and when I will then decide if it is worthy of debate or not. ;)
 

Kev45

A beautiful sunset that was mistaken for a dawn.
Joined
Nov 2, 2022
Messages
738
Reaction score
530
We've all sinned, and the extent of God's mercy is profound. God is so merciful that any of us - even those who have turned away from practices that take even human lives can stand before God as forgiven, based on the sanctity of Jesus' blood he poured out for us. But this is by being obedient to God's instructions, using HIS provisions, and ensuring that the works are dead works (Hebrews 9:12-15).

Some may say "Yeah, but I did it to save a life" or "But I enjoy eating black pudding". That's all fine and good. You are free to do as you please. The point is this: The Bible's law on blood is not exclusive to eating of it, but is to do with the sacred nature of how God views blood, and how those of us who want to please God should be aware of, so we can change to HIS standards, and not change HIS standards to OUR standards. Not all want to please God, nor even acknowledge him. That's fine for them. Good for them. But for those who wish to please God, we have these laws and principles to apply.

Brilliant, so you're damned if you live a good decent life but enjoy a tasty black pudding with your full English. Pop next door and savagely murder your neighbours and their children, repent and beg forgiveness, and all is good in God's eyes.

:)
 

A_Son_of_God

Forum Reasoner - Nemesis of the Trolls
Joined
Feb 25, 2023
Messages
339
Reaction score
94
I'll interpret your stolen, plagiarized views, how I so choose, and whether you like it or not.

Now post a link to the original article, so I can judge the article in full context and when I will then decide if it is worthy of debate or not. ;)
Such a hateful little attitude. You're not worthy to debate with by me. I'll just use you as examples. Thank you :)

And once again, the theme is "Biblical Use of Blood - Was It All About Food?" You seem to be having a lot of trouble with this theme thing.
 

Kev45

A beautiful sunset that was mistaken for a dawn.
Joined
Nov 2, 2022
Messages
738
Reaction score
530
Such a hateful little attitude. You're not worthy to debate with by me. I'll just use you as examples. Thank you :)

Yet it is you constantly sneering and being aggressive towards ANYONE else who challenges your primitive views.

You won't post a link to the original source, simply because it will reveal the extremist sites you frequent.

Have a great day. ;)
 

A_Son_of_God

Forum Reasoner - Nemesis of the Trolls
Joined
Feb 25, 2023
Messages
339
Reaction score
94
Yet it is you constantly sneering and being aggressive towards ANYONE else who challenges your primitive views.

You won't post a link to the original source, simply because it will reveal the extremist sites you frequent.

Have a great day. ;)
You have enough information. Your attempts at challenging "primitive views" come in the way of tangential attacks, strawmanning and insults. This is your squadron of attack. Mine is logic. See, once again, you miss the theme, because as you admitted, you didn't read it. Just the last two paragraphs, and obviously you browsed over where to find it, as you could see an article mentioned. But you don't seem to know how to use the internet, even though you're on it.

When you show the ability to address the theme, then we can discuss other stuff, but at the moment, it feels like I'd be beating a monkey with a stick for not writing Shakespeare if I try to show you anything. When you know how to use a theme, then we can move forward. Just random sideways attacks are cowardly, and demonstrate you have nothing to bring to the argument. Just a noisy monkey. Have a banana, and sit back in your cage!

Also, I frequent the debate room often. I don't see you raising your so-called challenges in there. Just silence, and on occasion an insult.

Now, one more time for the dummies!

The theme is, "Biblical Use of Blood - Was it All About Food?"
 
Last edited:

Kev45

A beautiful sunset that was mistaken for a dawn.
Joined
Nov 2, 2022
Messages
738
Reaction score
530
Mine is logic

There are much healthier, higher quality ways of helping a child instead of giving them a blood transfusion.


At the risk of repeating myself, again, I will interpret what you typed, an article you misquoted to reflect your own primitive views, how I so choose.

Now off you toddle and pass on your immense knowledge about how you and your imaginary God have more knowledge than the scientific community in relation to blood transfusions in regard to children who would otherwise die.

You are by far the angriest, aggressive Christian I have ever encountered, and I have a religious background.

Has your God not taught you how to control your hair trigger temper?

Just a noisy monkey. Have a banana, and sit back in your cage!

Yum yum blood free bananas.



Have a great day. :)
 

TwoWhalesInAPool

UKChat Celebrity
Joined
Aug 12, 2018
Messages
3,623
Reaction score
2,207
A poem by TWIAP

Hey god, the great divine,
A concept so absurd it's hard to define.
You're supposed to be all-knowing, and all wise,
But I know all that s.hit is just f.ucking lies.

You created this world, so we're told,
But its filled with suffering and that's getting old,
From the murders of children to wars and disease,
You sure fucking haven't got our interests at ease.

They claim you're all loving and full of grace,
But your followers often show a different face,
They judge and condemn, they lie, discriminate,
Using your name to justify their hate.

The book, they say, is your word,
But its filled with contradictions, absurdities unheard.
From killing children to owning slaves,
I don't for a moment believe it's your path that saves.

You're supposedly omnipotent, all-powerful too,
But you let bad things happen to the innocent, few.
If you are in control, why allow such pain?
It's all part of your sick and mysterious game?

Lets not forget about your chosen people,
Who claim to be special, but always act feeble.
Fighting over land, causing endless death and strife,
All in the name of their supposed happy eternal life.

So, hey god, forgive me if I'm not convinced,
If I question your existence, if I resist.
For in this world of chaos and despair,
Its bloody obvious your don't fucking care.

If you do exist, if you're truly there,
I hope you're having a laugh at this abominable affair.
Because, if you are all knowing, all seeing, all wise,
You have a sick sense of humour that is truly divine.

So, hey god, f.uck off now, give it a rest,
Your hate pushing ways are a right fucking pest,
The followers you have know not what they do,
They've fallen for a book cult filled with cuntish rules.

Amen.
 

A_Son_of_God

Forum Reasoner - Nemesis of the Trolls
Joined
Feb 25, 2023
Messages
339
Reaction score
94
A poem by TWIAP

Hey god, the great divine,
A concept so absurd it's hard to define.
You're supposed to be all-knowing, and all wise,
But I know all that s.hit is just f.ucking lies.

You created this world, so we're told,
But its filled with suffering and that's getting old,
From the murders of children to wars and disease,
You sure fucking haven't got our interests at ease.

They claim you're all loving and full of grace,
But your followers often show a different face,
They judge and condemn, they lie, discriminate,
Using your name to justify their hate.

The book, they say, is your word,
But its filled with contradictions, absurdities unheard.
From killing children to owning slaves,
I don't for a moment believe it's your path that saves.

You're supposedly omnipotent, all-powerful too,
But you let bad things happen to the innocent, few.
If you are in control, why allow such pain?
It's all part of your sick and mysterious game?

Lets not forget about your chosen people,
Who claim to be special, but always act feeble.
Fighting over land, causing endless death and strife,
All in the name of their supposed happy eternal life.

So, hey god, forgive me if I'm not convinced,
If I question your existence, if I resist.
For in this world of chaos and despair,
Its bloody obvious your don't fucking care.

If you do exist, if you're truly there,
I hope you're having a laugh at this abominable affair.
Because, if you are all knowing, all seeing, all wise,
You have a sick sense of humour that is truly divine.

So, hey god, f.uck off now, give it a rest,
Your hate pushing ways are a right fucking pest,
The followers you have know not what they do,
They've fallen for a book cult filled with cuntish rules.

Amen.
Are you aware you came into a debate section, and instead of debating, you just posted your opinion in a poem of ridicule and offense?

Why not actually try debating the point about whether the Biblical use of Blood was about food or not? Or do you just not know?
 

A_Son_of_God

Forum Reasoner - Nemesis of the Trolls
Joined
Feb 25, 2023
Messages
339
Reaction score
94
But for fun, let's break down your poem, and what it says:

A poem by TWIAP

Hey god, the great divine,
A concept so absurd it's hard to define.
What is so absurd it's hard to define? That there's a lifegiver? You instead think that energy one day had decided to settle down and make matter, but to make itself, it decided to follow simple rules that are defined logically, so that in the end, something could exist that breaks down, when energy was always there? I know you won't understand this.
You're supposed to be all-knowing, and all wise,
But I know all that s.hit is just f.ucking lies.

You know, do you? If you had read the Bible, you'd see that God delegates tasks to his creation, with the understanding and trust that they will do what is right. For instance, when Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed, he didn't "know". What he did was send down delegates to investigate. Angels. One was even represented by using God's holy name. But if God was "all-knowing", in that he knew everything, why would he send down a delegation to confirm if something was true?
As for the lies and swearing bit, that's just your foul point of view towards the one who gave you life.
You created this world, so we're told,
But its filled with suffering and that's getting old,
From the murders of children to wars and disease,
You sure fucking haven't got our interests at ease.

The murders of children in wars, and disease, are all consequences of us deciding we know a better way to live than the way we were made. If I buy a car, and use it for demolition derby's, I can't expect to take it back to the manufacture for leaking oil, nor can I blame him for not making it indestructible. It wasn't made for that purpose. If we treat it like crap, we reap the consequences. We've disregarded God, all the way back. This is YOUR way of life, mine too, but not God's. God is separate from it. He will fix it when the issue is resolved about us being so rebellious that we'll destroy everything in our path to get our own way.
They claim you're all loving and full of grace,
But your followers often show a different face,
They judge and condemn, they lie, discriminate,
Using your name to justify their hate.

You accuse all lovers of God of badness. That is unfair. Also, God is full of grace, and love. And yes, many do use God to justify their hate. Thankfully, the majority of them refuse to use God's holy, clean name. Some don't even know it.
The book, they say, is your word,
But its filled with contradictions, absurdities unheard.
From killing children to owning slaves,
I don't for a moment believe it's your path that saves.
We can discuss - if you choose to be polite, and not full of insults - any apparent contradiction you find. One by one.
Killing children...yet here are women pushing for abortion rights, and other politicians telling Mums and Dads that their children should be on the front line. I don't see your point here. Are you out talking to these people about this wickedness? Are you part of it yourself?

As for slaves, we still have slaves. We still ARE slaves. The good thing is at present, we can choose to be slaves to many things. As is written, "We are all slaves to our own masters".

You're supposedly omnipotent, all-powerful too,
But you let bad things happen to the innocent, few.
If you are in control, why allow such pain?
It's all part of your sick and mysterious game?
Omnipotent IS all-powerful.
Yes. God does let bad things happen to the innocent. He lets us reap the consequences of our own ways. When I say "our own ways", I mean as a society. We are getting false imprisonments due to our own ways of dealing with law. Innocent people die of disease because of OUR OWN inherent sicknesses, which are the consequences of sin, let alone our own practices that we currently do right now. Also, the pollution from selfish businesses.
Why does God allow it? That's another subject, but if you are genuine, feel free to ask. And no, it's no game. It's evidence.

Lets not forget about your chosen people,
Who claim to be special, but always act feeble.
Fighting over land, causing endless death and strife,
All in the name of their supposed happy eternal life.
The Israelites were given land, and this land was given to them while the first inhabitants of the earth were still alive - namely Shem. Abram was given a promise that the land of Canaan would become his. And Canaan was possibly still alive too. But the promise given to Abram occurred while Shem was still alive. Therefore, all on the earth at that time who survived the flood had potentially the knowledge that the land belonged to Abram, and were given a 430 year eviction notice. We can see how they responded though for the most part, by trying to persecute Abram and his descendents.
This - by the way - is the only kind of physical war that God permitted his people to do. Taking of their land (back in the days of Abraham through to the Israelites) and defending it from attackers. There are no God-ordained "Christian" wars.
So, hey god, forgive me if I'm not convinced,
If I question your existence, if I resist.
For in this world of chaos and despair,
Its bloody obvious your don't fucking care.
God does care. What happens though is people don't understand why God allows such things. For instance, they say, "How can God allow innocent children to die?" But when given an answer, they won't listen to it.God is allowing it, because us humans have chosen to have a godless world, and stated before the whole universe that we can do it better on our own. So to blame God for not being involved is simply unfair. We are reaping what we sow. A world without God in those instances of rulership. Yet he still provides air, ground, water, soil, food, and many good things. He is letting us though demonstrate to ourselves and others that of which we claim: That we really can do it if given enough time. God's not involving himself in it is allowing proof that we're up the creek without a paddle. We kill the earth, we build cities on farmland, and crap in our fresh water, then boast about how clever we are.

If you do exist, if you're truly there,
I hope you're having a laugh at this abominable affair.
Because, if you are all knowing, all seeing, all wise,
You have a sick sense of humour that is truly divine.

Why would you WANT God to laugh. He's not laughing over this. In fact, in the future, he'll administer his discipline and put earth's affairs in order. Those who continue to debate that they know a better way will have been well and truly exposed as liars and charletans.
So, hey god, f.uck off now, give it a rest,
Your hate pushing ways are a right fucking pest,
The followers you have know not what they do,
They've fallen for a book cult filled with cuntish rules.

God is not hate, but love. The problem is, you don't want to know, and still believe that you know best. God is going to allow you to do so too. He hasn't left us in the lurch. He's had written how it is, and how it will be. Also how to survive what is coming, but it is up to us to decide to look...or not.
It is still sad that a second person decides to come to a debate section and be off topic. It must be the education system lacking.
 
Back
Top