The Moral Argument FOR God [Archive] - Bibles, Wheels, and Brains Forum

CWH

04-07-2011, 09:34 PM

I have set up a new thread to discuss the Morality of God as against the atheist's view of the immorality of God. God's concept of Morality is different from human's concept. The main purpose of this thread is to prevent us from falling into the atheist's trap to convince us of the immorality of God. Woe to those who made people atheist for "the fool said in his heart, there is no God". In this thread, we will focus only on the Morality of God. There are many articles in the internet on the morality of God, one such is:

http://www.rationalchristianity.net/moral_authority.html

God's moral authority

What gives God the right to have total control of the universe?
The real question is, why wouldn't an omniscient, omnipotent, morally perfect God have the right to do as he sees fit? We are used to thinking about human rights and what humans should and shouldn't do, so we are likely to make the mistake of thinking of God as a more powerful (and therefore more corrupt) human. However, God is not a human who has somehow acquired great power; instead he is Deity, a supernatural being who is far superior to humans and who has a perfect mind and heart.

There are many reasons why mere humans do not have the right to be supreme rulers of the universe:

They might make a disastrous mistake due to ignorance, inexperience, fatigue, etc.
They could have evil intentions and use their power for evil, or they could be fooled by an evil person
They might be corrupted by flattery and think themselves wiser and greater than they really were
Even if they wanted to do good, they wouldn't know for sure what would be best for everyone
They are likely to show favoritism to some and treat others unfairly
Yet none of these reasons are applicable to God. God has perfect knowledge and wisdom; God never gets tired or makes mistakes; and God is perfectly good and just.
What makes it right for God to take human life, when he forbids us to do so?

Humans can take life, but we can't bring the dead back to life, nor can we control what happens to someone after they die. A human's killing another human is a destructive and irresponsible act, for once we kill someone, we can't undo it or control the harm that results.

God, however, has greater abilities and knowledge than we do, including control over life and death. If God kills someone, he is able to bring them back to life or to place them in any sort of afterlife he chooses. God's use of death is comparable to someone burning a fire in a fireplace: it can be controlled, lit or extinguished at will, and used for a purpose. In contrast, humans' use of death is like setting fire to a dry field: the fire rages out of control, and consequently is dangerous and destructive.

Furthermore, what is death? Many believe that death is the end of both one's body and one's mind/personality/soul. If so, death is a destructive act for both humans and God. Yet if Christianity is true, one's soul is not destroyed, but continues to exist in an afterlife. In this case, death is not destruction, but rather a transfer from life on earth to an afterlife of eternal joy or just punishment.

What gives God the right to do things to others without their permission?

God has given people autonomy in a wide range of areas. We make choices every day about how to spend our time and money, whether to do right or wrong and even whether to follow God or not. God does not force us to do his will, for he wants us to choose to do what is right (2 Cor 9:7, 1 Jn 4:18). Yet God has the right to, and does, change the circumstances of our lives.

If God were required to ask people's permission before he did anything that affected them, he would be prevented from doing good, including some good which only he is able to do (e.g. miracles). People might not give permission for God to do some good things because they wouldn't be able to understand how it would result in good, wouldn't want to endure short-term suffering to receive a long-term benefit, or even because they wished to harm themselves or others. Suppose parents had to ask their children's permission instead of requiring them to do certain things. There would be a lot of children who would be malnourished and/or sick, ignorant, selfish and unable to care for themselves, for what child willingly consents to receive shots, go to school, do chores, etc.? While adults have more knowledge and maturity than children, we are still ignorant and immature in comparison with God, and consequently don't always know what's best for us.

Also, there are things which we would never realize would make us happy until they were given to us or happened to us. Many Christians would never have given their consent to the circumstances that led them to become Christians, and probably could not have realized in advance what joy and peace they would have after becoming Christians. If God had to get their consent beforehand, he wouldn't have been able to bring them true happiness and fulfillment.

Requiring God to receive the permission of humans before he acts would make him dependent on and controlled by humans. How can it be good for God, who is omniscient and morally and otherwise perfect, to be controlled by humans, who have limited knowledge and intelligence and often make mistakes or commit outright evil?

What about human rights?

What is a human right? When we talk about human rights, we generally mean that one human doesn't have the right to do particular things to another human, like kill them, enslave them, etc. Why is it wrong for someone to do a certain thing to another? There are several possible reasons:

Humans have an inherent, inalienable right not to have that thing done to them, because it's always immoral for anyone to do that thing to another
Humans possess certain characteristics (e.g. the capacity to reason) which makes it immoral for anyone to do that thing to them
Humans are equals and one equal does not have the right to do that thing to another
Which human rights are inalienable? Thanks to Thomas Jefferson, we speak of our "inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Yet these so-called inalienable rights are alienable. If someone walks into a school and begins shooting the students and teachers, others have the right to take the shooter's life to prevent further murders or take away their liberty by incarcerating them for life.
Are there any truly inalienable human rights? Humans have the right to a fair trial for their crimes and just punishment for the crimes they've committed. There is no case in which a biased trial or undue punishment is morally justifiable, thus these rights are inalienable - and they are respected by God.

If reason (2) applies to any of our rights, which rights are they and which human characteristic grants us those rights? Animals can feel pain and emotion, and they have conscious minds and the ability to make choices and act on them. Yet most people believe we have the right to limit their liberty (by keeping cats indoors, keeping dogs on leashes or inside fences, etc.) and cause them some amount of fear and pain (by taking them to the vet) in order to protect them. Additionally, many people believe we have the right to perform medical research on animals in order to save human lives. Twelve-year-old children are human, have intelligence and can communicate their desires and even make moral decisions, yet their liberty is restricted by their parents and the government and they are forced to do many things against their will.

Finally, reason (3) applies only to interaction among equals; it applies to human-human interaction, but not human-God interaction. God is not merely our physical superior, but our mental, intellectual and moral superior.

Many Blessings.

Richard Amiel McGough

04-07-2011, 10:46 PM

david777

05-02-2011, 02:54 PM

Hi everyone.
Concerning the morality of God - I want to know what to make of all these internet websites that claim God is sending all the earthquakes, tsunamis, oil spills, economic downturns, etc., as punishment (judgment) for the sins and transgressions of the country where they occur.

I always argue that they are either chance, as in:
Ecclesiastes 9:11:
Again I saw that under the sun the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, nor bread to the wise, nor riches to the intelligent, nor favor to those with knowledge, but time and chance happen to them all.

Or if not a chance happening, they are the work of satan, and God has merely lifted His hand of protection to allow the event to happen.

People seem to always respond this way: that no, it is the hand of God sending these things as judgment. When I ask how they know this, they say that God speaks to them and tells them it is His judgment.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

throwback

05-02-2011, 03:23 PM

We all exist because GOD decided to create the world we live in. Our lives and existence did not come about by ANY say so of our own and eventually we will all die.
Having established the above as fact, let's bring into focus how the lifegiver can be viewed as a murderer keeping in mind that since MAN brought sin into the world (which results in death), all will eventually die. Murder is defined as the unlawful killing of another human being with "malice aforethought." In order for GOD to be a murderer, HE would have to be a being who unlawfully takes the life of another based on HIS predetermined malicous intent. According to the definition of murder, it is not possible for GOD to be a murderer of humans then because God has the authority to give and take lives.
We all know that that is not even the issue. The issue is whether or not the actions of GOD or the actions of those obeying the direct orders of GOD are a reflection of an evil charactor existing within GOD. So the question is not, "Is GOD a murderer?," but rather; "Is GOD evil?". In order to answer this question we need to focus on exactly what 'evil' is.

As Christians, this issue is not something we can just sweep und and the rug and ignore. There are those out there like Richard Dawkins who have read the OT and become very familiar with it and in turn have concluded the following:

The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.

We MUST be able to dismantle such attacks on our Creator with logic and scripture.

Richard Amiel McGough

05-04-2011, 11:34 AM

As Christians, this issue is not something we can just sweep und and the rug and ignore. There are those out there like Richard Dawkins who have read the OT and become very familiar with it and in turn have concluded the following:

The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.

We MUST be able to dismantle such attacks on our Creator with logic and scripture.
I agree that Christians "MUST be able to dismantle such attacks with logic and scripture" if they want to maintain a fundamentalist doctrine of the Bible as the "inerrant Word of God." But unfortunately, that is simply impossible. The only solution is to reject the Scriptures that teach the moral abominations and logical absurdities. If the Bible is really of God, then we must understand those texts as some sort of "test" to see if we will submit ourselves to TRUTH or to false dogma about the Bible as the "infallible and inerrant Word of God."

To see how utterly impossible it is to "dismantle" the truth that the Bible really does contain moral abominations, just take a look at this article called One More Reason Religion Is So Messed Up: Respected Theologian Defends Genocide and Infanticide (http://www.alternet.org/belief/150742/one_more_reason_religion_is_so_messed_up%3A_respec ted_theologian_defends_genocide_and_infanticide/?page=entire). The "respected theologian" is William Lane Craig, and he has made a total fool of himself and the Christian faith in his attempt to justify the unjustifiable. Just read the article and see which side makes more sense. Skeptics and atheists are now legitimately MOCKING one of the most famous Christian apologists because of the abject absurdity of his arguments. Craig said that killing babies under the age of accountability is fine because they go to heaven anyway!!! Here is what he wrote (http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5767):
Moreover, if we believe, as I do, that God’s grace is extended to those who die in infancy or as small children, the death of these children was actually their salvation. We are so wedded to an earthly, naturalistic perspective that we forget that those who die are happy to quit this earth for heaven’s incomparable joy. Therefore, God does these children no wrong in taking their lives.
By Craig's logic, abortionists are the greatest saints who ever have lived because many of the babies they killed would have grown up to be unrepentant sinners. The only reason they got into heaven was because the abortionist killed them before the "age of accountability." God himself would not have been able to save them when they were unrepentant sinful adults. Therefore, the abortionists are greater than God, because they saved souls that God Himself could not have saved - according to William Lane Craig, anyway.

Note also that Craig is using exactly the same logic as the suicide bombers who say that it doesn't matter who they kill because the Muslems will go to heaven and the heathen will go to hell, so all is good.

This again shows the moral and intellectual corruption caused by fundamentalist religion. We see the same perverse hatred of humanity and justification of naked wickedness in both Islam and Christianity.

throwback

05-04-2011, 01:11 PM

I agree that Christians "MUST be able to dismantle such attacks with logic and scripture" if they want to maintain a fundamentalist doctrine of the Bible as the "inerrant Word of God." But unfortunately, that is simply impossible. The only solution is to reject the Scriptures that teach the moral abominations and logical absurdities. If the Bible is really of God, then we must understand those texts as some sort of "test" to see if we will submit ourselves to TRUTH or to false dogma about the Bible as the "infallible and inerrant Word of God."

I don't know RAM. I, though not a fan of fundie religion do trust that the scriptures in their original forms are in fact inspired by God. If that is the case, I say this:
Truth need not hide or run from logic, for when the entirety of truth becomes evident, truth and logic can become one and the same. So in light of this I ask this question; Is God evil?
My answer is a resounding NO, and here's why.

Consider what our basis is for judging God. I contend that our only basis for judging Him is only one fold, and that is this; does He do what He says he will do? That's it! Apart from His faithfulness to His words, we have no basis for judging God. We cannot use the standards we'd use for our peers (other humans) because the creater is peerless and has full authority and control of our present and future in HIS hands. The fact that HE designed us and our habitation must also be considered as well as the need to give thought to why HE created us and our habitation in the 1st place. With those things being said and us realizing that we are HIS creations and made for HIS purposes so that HIS will will be accomplished we must realize that we have no basis to judge our creator as HIS creations other than making our judgments based on whether or not the Creator does to us and with us what HE said HE would do. If HE has never communicated with us, then we have no basis, but if HE has, then all we can hold against HIM are HIS words. If HE does not keep HIS word, then and only then can we say with any degree of accuracy that THE GOD is not a good god.

But I can hear the objection then arise; How can God have millions killed? HE's a genocidal malevalent ego-tripin' freak! Get that emotional nonlogical reaction out, then think for a moment. God is the creator and sustainer as well as the judge, jury, and executioner all in one. It's not that God has some power, He has all power and is therefore peerless. So Him killing one of us is not the same as one of us killing our fellow man as we have NO AUTHORITY over the lives of man, God does. That means that HE alone has the R-I-G-H-T to decide who lives or dies and in acting upon that right He can choose life or death. Neither choice would be either right or wrong, just authorized.

throwback

05-04-2011, 01:23 PM

It will help us better understand this issue if we understand sin and its relationship to authority. Sin seems to involve a couple things. One is knowing what is right and not doing it and the other appears to be acting beyond the scope one one's God-given authority. For example let's consider stealing and why it's wrong. It involves the unauthorized taking something that is under the authority of or is the possession of another. We can even describe a sin like murder simularly in that when we murder someone, we have decided to take a life we have not been given authority to take. God alone has the authority over life (remember, all souls are His), therefore the only way man can rightfully take another's life or even his own would be for God to give him that authority. That is why authorized killing is not a sin because God, the one who has authority over the lives of men, has called for it in those instances.

Richard Amiel McGough

05-04-2011, 09:34 PM

I don't know RAM. I, though not a fan of fundie religion do trust that the scriptures in their original forms are in fact inspired by God. If that is the case, I say this:
Truth need not hide or run from logic, for when the entirety of truth becomes evident, truth and logic can become one and the same. So in light of this I ask this question; Is God evil?
My answer is a resounding NO, and here's why.

Consider what our basis is for judging God. I contend that our only basis for judging Him is only one fold, and that is this; does He do what He says he will do? That's it! Apart from His faithfulness to His words, we have no basis for judging God. We cannot use the standards we'd use for our peers (other humans) because the creater is peerless and has full authority and control of our present and future in HIS hands. The fact that HE designed us and our habitation must also be considered as well as the need to give thought to why HE created us and our habitation in the 1st place. With those things being said and us realizing that we are HIS creations and made for HIS purposes so that HIS will will be accomplished we must realize that we have no basis to judge our creator as HIS creations other than making our judgments based on whether or not the Creator does to us and with us what HE said HE would do. If HE has never communicated with us, then we have no basis, but if HE has, then all we can hold against HIM are HIS words. If HE does not keep HIS word, then and only then can we say with any degree of accuracy that THE GOD is not a good god.

But I can hear the objection then arise; How can God have millions killed? HE's a genocidal malevalent ego-tripin' freak! Get that emotional nonlogical reaction out, then think for a moment. God is the creator and sustainer as well as the judge, jury, and executioner all in one. It's not that God has some power, He has all power and is therefore peerless. So Him killing one of us is not the same as one of us killing our fellow man as we have NO AUTHORITY over the lives of man, God does. That means that HE alone has the R-I-G-H-T to decide who lives or dies and in acting upon that right He can choose life or death. Neither choice would be either right or wrong, just authorized.
There is a fundamental problem with your argument. If you are correct, and it is "right" for God to do anything he desires, then it is utterly meaningless to say that God is "righteous" or "good." The words "righteous" and "good" would then have no meaning when used to describe God because they do not have the same meaning they have when used in any other context. So what do they mean? God could order the murder of little children, and it would be "righteous" and "good." God could torture souls in hell forever, and it would be "righteous" and "good." If everything that God does is "righteous" and "good" by definition, even when that definition contradicts the normal meaning of those words in every other instance, what then do those words signify? What do they tell us about God? The answer is "nothing."

Furthermore, most Christians, like William Lane Craig, say that without God there would be no absolute standard for morality. They say that the only reason we can know anything about absolute goodness is because goodness is grounded in God. But that is meaningless if God acts in ways that would be evil for us to do. When we look at God, we see that his character (as described in some passages of the Bible) appears to be evil according to the what the Bible teaches about goodness. How then can God be the ground of goodness?

Now the fatal error in your argument arises when God is not the one directly "doing" the evils, but rather commands or sanctions evils amongst humans. He sanctioned the evil of slavery and the murder of the whole tribe of Benjamin (including women and children) and the subsequent murder of everyone of Jabeshgilead for the express purpose of kidnapping their virgins to be sex slaves! These commands do not become "righteous" and "good" merely because they were sanctioned by God! They are intrinsically evil, and anyone who cannot see this is morally corrupted. These facts prove that morality is not founded in Scripture or the God described therein.

All the best.

throwback

05-05-2011, 12:11 PM

There is a fundamental problem with your argument. If you are correct, and it is "right" for God to do anything he desires, then it is utterly meaningless to say that God is "righteous" or "good." The words "righteous" and "good" would then have no meaning when used to describe God because they do not have the same meaning they have when used in any other context. So what do they mean? God could order the murder of little children, and it would be "righteous" and "good." God could torture souls in hell forever, and it would be "righteous" and "good." If everything that God does is "righteous" and "good" by definition, even when that definition contradicts the normal meaning of those words in every other instance, what then do those words signify? What do they tell us about God? The answer is "nothing."

Furthermore, most Christians, like William Lane Craig, say that without God there would be no absolute standard for morality. They say that the only reason we can know anything about absolute goodness is because goodness is grounded in God. But that is meaningless if God acts in ways that would be evil for us to do. When we look at God, we see that his character (as described in some passages of the Bible) appears to be evil according to the what the Bible teaches about goodness. How then can God be the ground of goodness?

Now the fatal error in your argument arises when God is not the one directly "doing" the evils, but rather commands or sanctions evils amongst humans. He sanctioned the evil of slavery and the murder of the whole tribe of Benjamin (including women and children) and the subsequent murder of everyone of Jabeshgilead for the express purpose of kidnapping their virgins to be sex slaves! You exaggerate here RAM. Have you been drinking the evilbible.com Kool-Aid?
These commands do not become "righteous" and "good" merely because they were sanctioned by God! They are intrinsically evil, and anyone who cannot see this is morally corrupted. These facts prove that morality is not founded in Scripture or the God described therein.

All the best.

Here are some things we know. One can engage in an activity and that activity can be good, bad, or neither. So to say that everything one does is either good or bad (righteous or unrighteous) is not being all inclusive. Things can be done that do not fall into either category. Secondly, we know that evil and bad or should I say unrighteousness, are not always one and the same. Evil is NOT always wrong and sinful. It can be simply just an unfortunate occurance and at other times evil can even be necessary. Isaiah 45:7 comes to mind as it speaks of God being the originator of both good and evil. Evil is defined as the intention or effect of causing harm or destruction. That means that anyone who carries out a judgment whether it is a just or an unjust judgment that results in the harm or another is engaging in evil. Spanking is evil, sentencing a criminal to be punished (harmed) is evil, and even emploding an old building is engaging in an evil act because it results in destruction.

According to scripture we can accurately say that nothing that is done by or commissioned by God is unrighteous thought some things are in fact evil (AD 70 Jerusalem anyone?). So, what exactly is right and by extention righteousness?
The Hebrew word for righteousness is tseh'-dek, according to Gesenius's Strong's Concordance:6664. It is defined as integrity, equity, justice, and straightness. It carries an undertone of being innocent, true, and sincere. In one instance the word means being right and in another it is used to mean doing what is right or practicing righteousness.

----
You said that God could order murder. What I am saying is that such a thing is impossible for GOD to do because HE is God. If GOD orders a killing it cannot be murder as murder is the UNAUTHORIZED and premeditated taking of a life. God being the author of life is the SOLE AUTHORITY on life and is the ONLY one who can lawfully decide who lives and dies because of that fact. SO the only ones who can rightfully kill are God and those acting under His direct or implied authority.

Richard Amiel McGough

05-05-2011, 01:36 PM

Hey there throwback,

Could you please elaborate on your comment that said "You exaggerate here RAM. Have you been drinking the evilbible.com Kool-Aid?"? The reason I ask is because it seems that if anything, I understated the facts. I did not go into the gruesome detail about how violent men armed with swords ripped apart the bodies of women and children when they killed of every single member of the tribe of Benjamin except the 600 soldiers who escaped! How could anyone "exaggerate" the grotesque immorality of their wicked actions? And the Scripture is clear - God himself declared that he would "deliver them" into the hand of Israel, so God himself not only sanctioned, but enabled the killing of all the women and children of the tribe of Benjamin. Are you aware of these facts? You don't need to go to evilbible.com to get this information, it's in the Bible itself, and that's where I found it, much to my chagrin.

Richard Amiel McGough

05-05-2011, 01:50 PM

Here are some things we know. One can engage in an activity and that activity can be good, bad, or neither. So to say that everything one does is either good or bad (righteous or unrighteous) is not being all inclusive. Things can be done that do not fall into either category. Secondly, we know that evil and bad or should I say unrighteousness, are not always one and the same. Evil is NOT always wrong and sinful. It can be simply just an unfortunate occurance and at other times evil can even be necessary. Isaiah 45:7 comes to mind as it speaks of God being the originator of both good and evil. Evil is defined as the intention or effect of causing harm or destruction. That means that anyone who carries out a judgment whether it is a just or an unjust judgment that results in the harm or another is engaging in evil. Spanking is evil, sentencing a criminal to be punished (harmed) is evil, and even emploding an old building is engaging in an evil act because it results in destruction.

According to scripture we can accurately say that nothing that is done by or commissioned by God is unrighteous thought some things are in fact evil (AD 70 Jerusalem anyone?). So, what exactly is right and by extention righteousness?
The Hebrew word for righteousness is tseh'-dek, according to Gesenius's Strong's Concordance:6664. It is defined as integrity, equity, justice, and straightness. It carries an undertone of being innocent, true, and sincere. In one instance the word means being right and in another it is used to mean doing what is right or practicing righteousness.

The word "evil" does not have only one meaning. For God to judge the unrepentant members of a nation like Israel in 70 AD does not seem "evil" in the moral since - though it certainly is "evil" in the sense of "calamity" to those being judged. I never claimed that such judgments were morally evil, so you are merely confusing the issue by bringing this up.

My contention is that the murder of the non-virginal women and their babies and their whole families, with the virgins KIDNAPPED and taken to be SEX-SLAVES was a MORAL EVIL. That's the issue I raised, and that is the issue you need to address. No amount of abstract philosophical word-twisting justification is going to cut it here. We are talking turkey about what the Bible actually states.

Also, I think it would help if you addressed the specific issues I brought up in Post #5 where I quoted William Lane Craig as saying that "the death of these children was actually their salvation" and that "God does these children no wrong in taking their lives." He based his argument on the "age of accountability" (a questionable doctrine at best) and so unwittingly declared that abortionists are the greatest of all saints since they got more people into heaven than anyone else. Indeed, they got people into heaven who would have been damned to hell by God if allowed to mature into unrepentant sinners. Why did you ignore that post?

Richard Amiel McGough

05-05-2011, 02:10 PM

You said that God could order murder. What I am saying is that such a thing is impossible for GOD to do because HE is God. If GOD orders a killing it cannot be murder as murder is the UNAUTHORIZED and premeditated taking of a life. God being the author of life is the SOLE AUTHORITY on life and is the ONLY one who can lawfully decide who lives and dies because of that fact. SO the only ones who can rightfully kill are God and those acting under His direct or implied authority.
Murder is not the "unauthorized" killing, it is an UNJUST killing. If God orders an innocent human, guilty of no crime, to be killed, then God has ordered murder. This is established in Scripture:
Genesis 18:23 And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked? 24 Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein? 25 That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right? 26 And the LORD said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes.
Here we see that God is constrained to act according to the ordinary meaning of "righteousness." If your argument were true, God could simply have said "Shut up Abraham. I am God, everything I do is right, even when I destroy the righteous with the wicked."

I really think we should dig into the foundation of morality. Your idea of "authority" means nothing to me. That never has been and never will be the source of my moral intuitions. I know things are right or wrong because I am a human being with empathy and a living conscience. I know what's wrong because I empathize with my fellow humans and know that it is wrong to do to them what would be wrong to do to me. The Golden Rule is the foundation of morality. It has nothing to do with "authority." Immorality does not become morality merely because God has "authority" to order humans to do things that would, in any other circumstance, be utterly and totally and criminally IMMORAL! You and I both know that killing of babies is wrong, right? So why are you trying to justify the killing of babies? It is WRONG to kill babies! I can't believe the irony of your argument! Fundamentalist Christians usually argue AGAINST the killing of babies!

Please take a moment to reflect before answering. Do you really feel fine about the killing of those babies and their mothers and the entire families except the virgins who were kidnapped to serve for life as sex-slaves? How would you feel if we were talking about your mother, your little brother, and your virgin sister? I think it's time to "make real" with what the Bible actually states, or just forget about it.

throwback

05-05-2011, 03:19 PM

The word "evil" does not have only one meaning. For God to judge the unrepentant members of a nation like Israel in 70 AD does not seem "evil" in the moral since - though it certainly is "evil" in the sense of "calamity" to those being judged. I never claimed that such judgments were morally evil, so you are merely confusing the issue by bringing this up.

My contention is that the murder of the non-virginal women and their babies and their whole families, with the virgins KIDNAPPED and taken to be SEX-SLAVES was a MORAL EVIL. That's the issue I raised, and that is the issue you need to address. No amount of abstract philosophical word-twisting justification is going to cut it here. We are talking turkey about what the Bible actually states.

Also, I think it would help if you addressed the specific issues I brought up in Post #5 where I quoted William Lane Craig as saying that "the death of these children was actually their salvation" and that "God does these children no wrong in taking their lives." He based his argument on the "age of accountability" (a questionable doctrine at best) and so unwittingly declared that abortionists are the greatest of all saints since they got more people into heaven than anyone else. Indeed, they got people into heaven who would have been damned to hell by God if allowed to mature into unrepentant sinners. Why did you ignore that post?

As I said before, God cannot author murder, He required the killing of men and their families. This distinction is important because were it not understood, those who carried out God's command would be murderers as opposes to obedient followers of the command of God. Thus God AUTHORIZING and directing them to take lives and prisoners was in a real sense Him endowing them with His power and authority as it pertained to the lives of those who the Israelites warred with. A better question to address as we go forward would be whether or not God has the right to take the lives of any He choses. The answer to that question is pivotal as it pertains to how we side. In addition, we need to establish a hard and fast objective definition for what "moral evil" is. To answer your question about whether the deeds were evil in the sense or morally evil let me say this. If anyone aside from God set such things in motion the answer is yes because GOD ALONE has the authority to make such decisions.

What is God's responsibility to us? I submit that the only answer that is a logical conclusion is for Him to do to and with us as He said he would. Other than that, we have nothing to hold Him to or accuse Him with.

I do not agree with William Lane Craig in any of what he said. His first mistake is assuming that an eternal burning hell is taught in scripture followed by his declaration that the evil that happened to those judged by God was actually good for them. His conclusions were foolish IMHO.

throwback

05-05-2011, 03:34 PM

Murder is not the "unauthorized" killing, it is an UNJUST killing. If God orders an innocent human, guilty of no crime, to be killed, then God has ordered murder. This is established in Scripture:
Genesis 18:23 And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked? 24 Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein? 25 That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right? 26 And the LORD said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes.
Here we see that God is constrained to act according to the ordinary meaning of "righteousness." If your argument were true, God could simply have said "Shut up Abraham. I am God, everything I do is right, even when I destroy the righteous with the wicked."

I really think we should dig into the foundation of morality. Your idea of "authority" means nothing to me. That never has been and never will be the source of my moral intuitions. I know things are right or wrong because I am a human being with empathy and a living conscience. I know what's wrong because I empathize with my fellow humans and know that it is wrong to do to them what would be wrong to do to me. The Golden Rule is the foundation of morality. It has nothing to do with "authority." Immorality does not become morality merely because God has "authority" to order humans to do things that would, in any other circumstance, be utterly and totally and criminally IMMORAL! You and I both know that killing of babies is wrong, right? So why are you trying to justify the killing of babies? It is WRONG to kill babies! I can't believe the irony of your argument! Fundamentalist Christians usually argue AGAINST the killing of babies!

Please take a moment to reflect before answering. Do you really feel fine about the killing of those babies and their mothers and the entire families except the virgins who were kidnapped to serve for life as sex-slaves? How would you feel if we were talking about your mother, your little brother, and your virgin sister? I think it's time to "make real" with what the Bible actually states, or just forget about it.

Is it wrong to kill people? Absolutely it is in ALMOST every situation. Why is it wrong to take a life of a human being? That is the question that must be addressed; WHY? I believe that it is wrong for the simple reason that it involves acting beyond one's God-given authority. Killing is ALWAYS evil, but is sometimes (very rarely) not sinful. What determines whether or not it is sinful is whether or not the one who kills has been given the PROPER authority to do so.
Why is it okay to take the life of animals?
Answer, because we have been given dominion and authority by our creator over their lives.

BTW........
Are we playing with words? Unjust vs. unauthorized vs. the actual word used in the dictionary that both of us failed to use which is UNLAWFUL. Murder is the unlawful killing of another human being with "malice aforethought." My bad for "twisting" words earlier.

CWH

05-05-2011, 05:17 PM

Richard Amiel McGough

05-05-2011, 05:52 PM

Richard Amiel McGough

05-05-2011, 06:05 PM

As I said before, God cannot author murder, He required the killing of men and their families. This distinction is important because were it not understood, those who carried out God's command would be murderers as opposes to obedient followers of the command of God. Thus God AUTHORIZING and directing them to take lives and prisoners was in a real sense Him endowing them with His power and authority as it pertained to the lives of those who the Israelites warred with. A better question to address as we go forward would be whether or not God has the right to take the lives of any He choses. The answer to that question is pivotal as it pertains to how we side. In addition, we need to establish a hard and fast objective definition for what "moral evil" is. To answer your question about whether the deeds were evil in the sense or morally evil let me say this. If anyone aside from God set such things in motion the answer is yes because GOD ALONE has the authority to make such decisions.

What is God's responsibility to us? I submit that the only answer that is a logical conclusion is for Him to do to and with us as He said he would. Other than that, we have nothing to hold Him to or accuse Him with.

I do not agree with William Lane Craig in any of what he said. His first mistake is assuming that an eternal burning hell is taught in scripture followed by his declaration that the evil that happened to those judged by God was actually good for them. His conclusions were foolish IMHO.
I'm glad we agree about the foolishness of William Lane Craig's arguments.

I would like to find more agreement. It seems we are talking past each other. I have brought up many issues that you have not answered. You are repeating your argument about "authority" as the basis of morality without addressing my refutation of that argument.

Let me repeat - "authority" has nothing to do with the question if God is acting in a morally good and righteous way. The concepts of "good" and "righteous" and "moral" are objective standards. Any action by any agent can be judged as moral or immoral using those standards. This is obvious because Abraham asked if the Judge of all the earth (God) would not do right. This proves that the concept of "right" is an objective standard that applies to God as well as any human. If you deny this, then you obviate all the many verses that declare God is righteous. All those verses become empty of any semantic content. They tell us absolutely nothing about the nature of God. I have explained this before but you did not respond. Do you understand this point? It would be good if you would answer it.

Thanks!

Richard Amiel McGough

05-05-2011, 06:12 PM

Is it wrong to kill people? Absolutely it is in ALMOST every situation. Why is it wrong to take a life of a human being? That is the question that must be addressed; WHY? I believe that it is wrong for the simple reason that it involves acting beyond one's God-given authority. Killing is ALWAYS evil, but is sometimes (very rarely) not sinful. What determines whether or not it is sinful is whether or not the one who kills has been given the PROPER authority to do so.
Why is it okay to take the life of animals?
Answer, because we have been given dominion and authority by our creator over their lives.

BTW........
Are we playing with words? Unjust vs. unauthorized vs. the actual word used in the dictionary that both of us failed to use which is UNLAWFUL. Murder is the unlawful killing of another human being with "malice aforethought." My bad for "twisting" words earlier.
The problem with your "authority" argument is that it implies God could torture babies for fun - after all, he has the "authority." But you don't believe God would do that because you know it would be immoral! Therefore, you know that morality is not based on "authority" and your argument has been refuted. Do you agree?

throwback

05-06-2011, 10:23 AM

The problem with your "authority" argument is that it implies God could torture babies for fun - after all, he has the "authority." But you don't believe God would do that because you know it would be immoral! Therefore, you know that morality is not based on "authority" and your argument has been refuted. Do you agree?

My "authority" argument is one based on logic as opposed to religious dogma and because there is a difference between those 2 starting points what you will hear from me will be a bit different from what "Fundies" promote. I believe that because God is God, that means that there is a different standard for Him than there is for us.
You asked whether I believed that God could torture little babies for fun if He choose to do so and my answer to that is, believe it or not, YES. I believe His authority as the only being that is in fact GOD, gives Him the right to do as He chooses. Do I believe He would torture children for fun; of course I do not and the reason I believe He won't is because of how His charactor is described. He is described in many ways, but for the sake of our discussion I will focus on the descriptions that are oft ignored. He is said to be vengeful, judgmental, stubborn ("I change not"), authoritarian, condescending, and even wrathful. Religion has also unwittingly called Him sadistic, (although the Bible does not), by inserting the doctrine of an eternal burning hell into scripture. I say all of that to say that none of how He is depicted in scripture would allow for that behavior to occur.
At the same time, we know from scripture that He would send judgment upon nations. Those judgments will even include the death of women, children, unborn children, and perhaps even the the elderly. The question is not would He do this or won't He do that, but rather it is this: What actions would He be wrong for doing? So no matter how we come at this, it all comes back to authority, His ABSOLUTE authority and what that means is that He is only subject to the parameters He sets on Himself. To break that down further, I am saying that He actions can be judged based ONLY upon whether He does what He says He will do and whether He abides by the "rules" He sets for Himself. So if He says He acts righteously, then we are entitled to expect Him to act with integrity, equity, justice, and straightness.

You brought up the example of Abraham pleading with God about Sodom and Gomorrah as an exaple that places God under the same standard that man is under, but I fail to see that that is what that passage of scripture does. The reason I do not see it that way is because after all the pleading, God still eradicated those cities and Lot's family did not even make it out unscathed. Abraham's request to the Lord implied that destroying those who are practicing righteousness with those who practice wickedness would NOT be right. First off, let me point out that God never replied back to Abraham in the following way:
"You're right Abe, I cannot destroy the righteous with the wicked because that would not be right of Me."
Instead he simply aquiesed to the requests of His servant. But, for the sake of argument let's say that at some point prior God had made it known to Abraham that He would not destroy the wicked with the righteous and Abraham was bringing that limitation of what God could righteously do to the attention of the Lord. We now must ask whether God abided by this precept not only in Sodom, but also throughout the rest of scripture. In other words, was God consistant in giving the righteous an "out" before carrying out His judgments on a people? If what Abraham said was if fact binding then god would have to do this in EVERY situation.

----
With all that said, here are some questions I struggle to answer:
- Is it just to force a nation to suffer for the sins of its rulers?
- Is it just to subject Adam's decendants to the pains of sin's consequences even before they sin themselves? (ps. I'm not a proponent of original sin)
- Is it just to allow any sin to go unpunished in the manner God set worth to have that sin "paid for"? (ex. David's adultery with Uriah's wife called for the death penalty yet David was allowed to live. Was something done to justify David so that he need not face the prescribed penalty or can we simply charge that whole deal up to God being merciful to whom He wishes to be merciful to?)

Richard Amiel McGough

05-06-2011, 10:50 AM

CWH

05-06-2011, 11:12 AM

I would like to ask RAM some questions to understand what his thoughts are in regard to human concept of morality:

1. Is sex evil even with men and women other than own spouse?

2. Is prostituition evil?

3. Is masturbation evil?

4. Is killing of the enemy in war evil and sinful?

5. Is killing of Osama bin Laden evil?

6. Is the law of the survival of the fittest evil?

7. Is abortion sinful?

8. Where in the Bible is sex-slave mentioned? If so, then young and not so young women would also be kept.

9. Is killing of animals evil and sinful?

10. Is capital punishment sinful and evil?

Many Blessings.

In fact, I am not testing anyone's sex obsession. I am seriously trying to answer RAM"s question with a new perspective. Since RAM is not interested to answer any of the questions, the questions are now open to the floor. Seems like whatever futurist's questions and answers are not serious, only preterists' questions and answers are serious. Since RAM likes people to be open-minded, let's be open minded and discuss these issues which some may find taboo. The following are my answers to these questions and I welcome anyone to challenge my answers (in red). The fundamental principle is only God can forgive sin:

1. Is sex evil even with men and women other than own spouse?
Yes, it breaks the marriage law to be faithful to one another and marriage is sanctified by God...may even be considered as committing adultery.

2. Is prostituition evil?
Yes, but if it is done as a means of survival..to feed her family so to speak, then it may be pardonable.

3. Is masturbation evil?
I am talking about male masturbation...No, it will be discharged naturally anyway. And these are potential human babies. Would the slow death of babies and infants have thus resulted anyway due to lack of care and negligence? The killings would have ensured a more merciful death?

4. Is killing of the enemy in war evil and sinful?
Yes, taking another human life is sinful and evil even if allowed by law. However, the main blame goes to the one who orders it. And if it is a way to rid evil and uphold righteousness that may be pardonable. But if God ordains it, there is no sin as He will forgive the sin. Was it God's way to prevent sinful men from committing more sin?

5. Is killing of Osama bin Laden evil?
Yes, for the above reason in question 4.

6. Is the law of the survival of the fittest evil?
No, for it concerns the survival in general of the species. It certainly looks humanly immoral when animals kill including their young but that is not the case. God invented the law of the survival of the fittest. Was the killing of evil people which seems humanly immoral as a law of the survival of the fittest?

7. Is abortion sinful?
No, a fetus is not considered human until it is born or at least 6 months into pregnancy when it is believed then that the fetus has a soul.

8. Where in the Bible is sex-slave mentioned? If so, then young and not so young women would also be kept.
If sex-slavery was the reason then God would allowed them to keep all women virgin or not. The main purpose was obviously for procreation. To have sex with non-virginal women may have been deemed as adultery in God's eyes.

9. Is killing of animals evil and sinful?
No, Man is ordained to have dominion over all creatures.

10. Is capital punishment sinful and evil?
Yes, for the same reason as question 4.

Many Blessings.

Richard Amiel McGough

05-06-2011, 11:47 AM

In fact, I am not testing anyone's sex obsession. I am seriously trying to answer RAM"s question with a new perspective. Since RAM is not interested to answer any of the questions, the questions are now open to the floor. Seems like whatever futurist's questions and answers are not serious, only preterists' questions and answers are serious.

Hey there CHW,

You need to get away from the Preterist/Futurist debate for a while. This topic has nothing to do with eschatology. Questions from Futurists are no less valid than questions from Preterists. I didn't want to answer your questions because they seemed like just another "rabbit trail" that would lead nowhere. It seemed to me that if you wanted to enter the conversation, you would have begun by addressing the points I had already brought up. It's like you walked into the room, ignored everything that folks were talking about, and interrupted with a bunch of new questions. If you did not want to respond to what I had already said, why should I have expected you to respond if I answered your questions? It seemed rather pointless. That's why I did not answer.

But that said, I will respond to what you have written.

Since RAM likes people to be open-minded, let's be open minded and discuss these issues which some may find taboo. The following are my answers to these questions and I welcome anyone to challenge my answers (in red). The fundamental principle is only God can forgive sin:

That's great! I have no "taboo questions" on this forum, except ones that are asked only with the intent to offend, of course. But that's not what's going on here, so I am happy to respond to your questions and answers.

1. Is sex evil even with men and women other than own spouse?
Yes, it breaks the marriage law to be faithful to one another and marriage is sanctified by God...may even be considered as committing adultery.
I agree that it is morally wrong to have sex outside of marriage if it is in violation of sworn vows, but there are cases when a wife may want her husband to have sex with another, as in the case of Abraham and Sarah which God never objected to you know. This exemplifies how the Biblical teachings concerning marriage are totally confused. God allowed multiple wives in the OT. He never once said it was wrong for a man to have more than one wife. Indeed, he even gave David the wives (plural) that had belonged to Saul (2 Sam 12:8)! Furthermore, the Bible does not even define what constitutes a marriage. And for that matter, the Bible does not even have a word for "wife" - it just refers to her as "his woman."

2. Is prostituition evil?
Yes, but if it is done as a means of survival..to feed her family so to speak, then it may be pardonable.
I disagree. It is not a "good" thing in that it can spread disease. And it is not the "best" way to satisfy sexual desires since it does not form strong social relationships, but I see nothing "evil" about it. Indeed, it may be the only way that many socially inept men can ever find sexual satisfaction, which God programmed into them with the same sense of urgency as food and water. Other primates besides humans practice it, so it seems quite natural.

3. Is masturbation evil?
I am talking about male masturbation...No, it will be discharged naturally anyway. And these are potential human babies. Would the slow death of babies and infants have thus resulted anyway due to lack of care and negligence? The killings would have ensured a more merciful death?
Weird answer. Masturbation has nothing to do with "potential human babies." Masturbation is a very good thing for both men and women. It helps them understand their own bodies and it releases some to the urgency to find a mate so they won't rush in to a doomed marriage merely to satisfy their sexual desires. This happened a lot to Catholic kids who were taught that masturbation was a MORTAL SIN!

4. Is killing of the enemy in war evil and sinful?
Yes, taking another human life is sinful and evil even if allowed by law. However, the main blame goes to the one who orders it. And if it is a way to rid evil and uphold righteousness that may be pardonable. But if God ordains it, there is no sin as He will forgive the sin. Was it God's way to prevent sinful men from committing more sin?
Totally disagree. It is sorrowful to take a human life, but it is not a sin. To call it a "sin" is to confuse language because it a "sin" is, by definition, a "wrong" thing to do. Therefore, if a person SHOULD kill another person to save the life of the innocent, then it is not WRONG for to kill that person, and it can not be a sin. Simple as that.

5. Is killing of Osama bin Laden evil?
Yes, for the above reason in question 4.
Actually, it probably was a sin to kill Obama but not because of question 4. It was probably a sin because it appears they could have simply captured him and put him on trial. If he was convicted of his crime, then he could have been executed by the state.

6. Is the law of the survival of the fittest evil?
No, for it concerns the survival in general of the species. It certainly looks humanly immoral when animals kill including their young but that is not the case. God invented the law of the survival of the fittest. Was the killing of evil people which seems humanly immoral as a law of the survival of the fittest?
Animals are not subject to morality, so the question is meaningless. And it does not make sense to say that "God invented the law of survival of the fitness." That law didn't need to be "invented." It is a property of nature.

7. Is abortion sinful?
No, a fetus is not considered human until it is born or at least 6 months into pregnancy when it is believed then that the fetus has a soul.
Says who? Where did you get the information about when a fetus becomes human?

8. Where in the Bible is sex-slave mentioned? If so, then young and not so young women would also be kept.
If sex-slavery was the reason then God would allowed them to keep all women virgin or not. The main purpose was obviously for procreation. To have sex with non-virginal women may have been deemed as adultery in God's eyes.
To be used as a slave for procreation and wife is the same as a "sex slave.

9. Is killing of animals evil and sinful?
No, Man is ordained to have dominion over all creatures.
This is debatable. Animals have sufficient consciousness to suffer, so we definitely should not cause more suffering than necessary when "using" or "slaughtering" them, but the issue of "animal rights" is a gray area because we do not know how much consciousness they really have. So maybe yes, maybe no. But in no case can we justify killing animals because we are "ordained to have dominion over all creatures" since having dominion does not give the right to kill.

10. Is capital punishment sinful and evil?
Yes, for the same reason as question 4 .
You have just declared God to be a sinner because he commanded capital punishment. Nice work!

throwback

05-06-2011, 12:22 PM

OK - let me get this straight. Since God is God, he could act like the most wicked demon from the slimiest part of the pit of hell and it would be "right" and "morally good."

Is this the essence of your argument?

Since God is God, He can set in place the parameters of how He must behave toward His creations. The paramenters He sets in place do tell His creations of His charactor. No spirit being or human being has the ability to set their own parameters, only God can, and the course the reason why is because He alone is God.
He can, but will not behave as "the slimiest demon from the pits of hell" (if such a place even existed) because He inspired prophet told us He would not.

Look at the entire narrative of life. God created habitations, place live in those habitations, and allowed the sentient life forms to rule over the habitations they were placed in as wards. Man in our habitation was originally given but 1 prohibition, which we violated thus instituting the law of sin and death into our habitation. God, who has all power and in all likihood could have stopped the process and ended the suffering did not. Instead he allowed the world to continue with sentient man at its visible helm knowing that ALL men world face the death penalty. However, in His unspeakable wisdom and grace he made it so that man could not only remain sentient and free willed, but also so that man could live again and be clothed with immortality or given access to waters of life for ages of ages. That is a reflection of god's charactor as it gives the WHOLE PICTURE of things showing that death and suffering is not the end of it all and that the righteous will ultimately be blessed with life in the age of peace and happiness in the Kingdom of God.

Richard Amiel McGough

05-06-2011, 12:36 PM

Since God is God, He can set in place the parameters of how He must behave toward His creations. The paramenters He sets in place do tell His creations of His charactor. No spirit being or human being has the ability to set their own parameters, only God can, and the course the reason why is because He alone is God.
He can, but will not behave as "the slimiest demon from the pits of hell" (if such a place even existed) because He inspired prophet told us He would not.

Look at the entire narrative of life. God created habitations, place live in those habitations, and allowed the sentient life forms to rule over the habitations they were placed in as wards. Man in our habitation was originally given but 1 prohibition, which we violated thus instituting the law of sin and death into our habitation. God, who has all power and in all likihood could have stopped the process and ended the suffering did not. Instead he allowed the world to continue with sentient man at its visible helm knowing that ALL men world face the death penalty. However, in His unspeakable wisdom and grace he made it so that man could not only remain sentient and free willed, but also so that man could live again and be clothed with immortality or given access to waters of life for ages of ages. That is a reflection of god's charactor as it gives the WHOLE PICTURE of things showing that death and suffering is not the end of it all and that the righteous will ultimately be blessed with life in the age of peace and happiness in the Kingdom of God.
I understand where you are coming from, but you seem to be missing the essence of the meaning of our moral words like "good" and "righteous." The problem is that you say "there is a different standard for Him than there is for us." This means that the assertion "God is good" has no meaning because the word "good" has a "different" (i.e. unknown) meaning when applied to God. But the Bible never talks that way. The Bible always speaks of God using the ordinary meaning of "good" and "righteous" that we use in every other context. I have repeated this a good number of times now. Do you understand why it is a problem?

And more importantly, none of you talk about "authority" or "setting parameters" has anything to do with my moral intuitions. The foundation of my moral intuitions is the Golden Rule which is pretty much an informal expression of Kant's Categorical Imperative. The problem with the "authority" view of morals is that it denies the reality of Objective Values. It says nothing is "intrinsically good" or "objectively good." Things are "good" only because God says so. This is an ancient philosophical question addressed by Plato as follows (from the wiki article on the Divine Command Theory of Morality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_command_theory)):
It is often argued that divine command theory is refuted by the Euthyphro dilemma (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthyphro_dilemma) (so named because a version of it first appeared in Plato (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato)'s dialogue Euthyphro (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthyphro)): "Is an action morally good because God commands it, or does God command it because it is morally good?"
Are you familiar with the Divine Command theory? Is it your position?

Charles Wade

05-07-2011, 10:10 AM

8002 GOD'S LANGUAGE THROUGH NATURE'S ELEMENTS ....Bertha Dudde - 25.9.1961

I expect from you, my servants, a restless commitment for Me an My kingdom, because of the requirement of the spiritual necessity of man. Just a short time is parting all of you of the last end, and what can happen to the saving of souls that should still be done, for the earth again will take in and absorb all, what failed as man, and it is a terrible lot, which I would like to spare any of you humans from. But you yourself will make the last decision with your free will. I for Myself can do nothing further but by continuously addressing you with My warnings, and everyone who gives Me support in this direction, will be blessed by Me. Thus shall be the continuous mentioning of the near end inclusive, that I beforehand will obviously express Myself through a grand nature event.... my last admonition is, once I speak to man who will not hear my words through the elements of nature....But this language can not be overheard, for man will stand horrified before an incomprehensible grand nature event, and no man will be spared in so far as, everywhere man lives the news will penetrate, that every individual personally feels spoken to, because he himself could be hit by the same event in his own home land.... for man will fear a repetition and therefore will have to be ready for a sudden demise (death).

Much sorrow and misery will have to pass over this earth, but yet it is only a remedy, which I apply out of love, to save the souls from destruction, from the horrible lot of captivity anew on this earth. But humans that will be hit by the nature events, those humans being its victims are not mercilessly given up to their fate....because of their premature ending of the life on earth. they will be granted a mercy care in the beyond....They still will have the opportunity to climb in the heights; they have the chance to come to the light in the beyond, which they disregarded on earth....They don't have to fear the captivity anew....unless they are to stubborn, that they are sinking into the depths as true devils, incorrigible and therefore would have not changed for the better while still alive on earth. And also the effect onto the humans from the nature event will be different, then again people will turn to Me in fear and as a result of the experienced rescue, will preserve to Me loyalty, where as the opposite will become obvious in the fall away from Me, because one will not let stand the "God of Love", who let happen such an event of destruction....for their dark spiritual position will not find an other explanation for that event.

But such a clear voice must sound from above, whether it will be recognized as My voice or not, for it is going with gigantic steps towards the end, even though only a few soles in trouble will find My way, it still will be of some gain, hence they are spared the long road through the creation of the earth, but can enter the kingdom beyond, in which they too can reach an ascent, which would have been questionable on the earth....on the other hand it would have led with grate probability towards the depth (or would have strived towards the depth.)

And I have to, lay it all before you, my servants. For you shall be forearmed, and you shall learn to watch the happenings around you from this side, and you shall dedicate yourself totally to Me and as my tools be continuously effective in My will....You should drop all your earthly thoughts, every....even the smallest....worry hand over to Me....you must totally absorb yourself in your vineyard work, however always pay attention to My inner instructions. But over eagerness is causing harm, where wisdom promotes all success and wisdom is always carried over to you, if you totally enter in my will, if you are only the executors of My will, and I know, that you, My servants, take your task serious, and that is why you continuously receive these directions, which you will feel in your hearts as My loving speech, to which you therefore will respond to, for the well being of your fellow man.

Oh if man would only know, what is about to happen to them....But they refuse to believe it, while it will be foretold to them, through the mouth of My prophets....And they can not be forced to believe. But the day is continuously moving closer, which will cause a total change to the living standard....and blessed, who will call on Me in extreme distress, for I will hear him and hear his plea, thus he won't be lost for ever....

Amen

throwback

05-10-2011, 10:49 AM

I understand where you are coming from, but you seem to be missing the essence of the meaning of our moral words like "good" and "righteous." The problem is that you say "there is a different standard for Him than there is for us." This means that the assertion "God is good" has no meaning because the word "good" has a "different" (i.e. unknown) meaning when applied to God. But the Bible never talks that way. The Bible always speaks of God using the ordinary meaning of "good" and "righteous" that we use in every other context. I have repeated this a good number of times now. Do you understand why it is a problem?

And more importantly, none of you talk about "authority" or "setting parameters" has anything to do with my moral intuitions. The foundation of my moral intuitions is the Golden Rule which is pretty much an informal expression of Kant's Categorical Imperative. The problem with the "authority" view of morals is that it denies the reality of Objective Values. It says nothing is "intrinsically good" or "objectively good." Things are "good" only because God says so. This is an ancient philosophical question addressed by Plato as follows (from the wiki article on the Divine Command Theory of Morality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_command_theory)):
It is often argued that divine command theory is refuted by the Euthyphro dilemma (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthyphro_dilemma) (so named because a version of it first appeared in Plato (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato)'s dialogue Euthyphro (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthyphro)): "Is an action morally good because God commands it, or does God command it because it is morally good?"
Are you familiar with the Divine Command theory? Is it your position?

I see your points. And for the record, I see the sense they make. But where we disagree I believe, is on how moral objectivism applies to a higher being like God. I totally agree with your golden rule assessment as it pertains to our humans interactions, but is the same standard for morality it provides applicable in man's dealings with ants, roaches, wasps, mosquitos, or even dogs?

I am not familiar with the Divine Command Theory, but it sounds kind of like a chicken or egg discussion. My position is that might, absolute might that is, makes right in that He who alone has this absolute authority has a totally different set of moral obligations than those who are His creations and subjects do.

I do not know if I am ready to say that the proper definition for wrong is acting outside of or bryond the scope of one's authority and that righteousness means acting within the scope of one's authority, but I do believe that these things play a huge factor in whether one's behavior is morally right or wrong.

Richard Amiel McGough

05-10-2011, 12:10 PM

I see your points. And for the record, I see the sense they make. But where we disagree I believe, is on how moral objectivism applies to a higher being like God. I totally agree with your golden rule assessment as it pertains to our humans interactions, but is the same standard for morality it provides applicable in man's dealings with ants, roaches, wasps, mosquitos, or even dogs?

Ethical theorists have different takes on how human moral standards apply to other species. But there would be no debate whatsoever if those species were found to be sentient on a level comparable to humans, as noted in the wiki article on sentience (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentience):
Sentience is the ability to feel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feeling), or perceive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perception), or be conscious (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness), or have subjective experiences. 18th century philosophers used the term to distinguish the ability to think ("reason (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reason)") from the ability to feel ("sentience"). In modern western philosophy, sentience is the ability to have sensations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensation_%28psychology%29) or experiences (known as "qualia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia)"). For Eastern philosophy, sentience is a metaphysical quality of all things that requires respect and care. The term is central to the philosophy of animal rights (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_rights), because sentience implies the ability to suffer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffering), which entails certain rights. In science fiction, a non-human character described as "sentient" will typically have similar abilities, qualities and rights to a human being.
But animal rights is not the issue. Your argument fails because we are made in the image of God. We are moral creatures only because God is a moral God. Therefore, morality cannot be "different" for God than it is for us - morality is a fundamental characteristic that we share with God.

Ask yourself "What does it mean to say that God is good?" The answer can be no other than "What does it mean to be good?"

I am not familiar with the Divine Command Theory, but it sounds kind of like a chicken or egg discussion. My position is that might, absolute might that is, makes right in that He who alone has this absolute authority has a totally different set of moral obligations than those who are His creations and subjects do.

I have no idea how you could think that "might makes right" in any truly moral sense. Moral goodness has nothing to do with power. On the contrary, there is a universal truism that states "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." And I would suggest that this is why God chose not to reveal himself in power, but rather in the weakness of the cross. The key is kenosis. Are you familiar with this teaching? It is the absolute essence of Christianity and the antithesis of the moral philosophy you seem to be advocating.

throwback

05-10-2011, 03:00 PM

Ethical theorists have different takes on how human moral standards apply to other species. But there would be no debate whatsoever if those species were found to be sentient on a level comparable to humans,

[/INDENT]But animal rights is not the issue. Your argument fails because we are made in the image of God. We are moral creatures only because God is a moral God. Therefore, morality cannot be "different" for God than it is for us - morality is a fundamental characteristic that we share with God.

Ask yourself "What does it mean to say that God is good?" The answer can be no other than "What does it mean to be good?"

I have no idea how you could think that "might makes right" in any truly moral sense. Moral goodness has nothing to do with power. On the contrary, there is a universal truism that states "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." And I would suggest that this is why God chose not to reveal himself in power, but rather in the weakness of the cross. The key is kenosis. Are you familiar with this teaching? It is the absolute essence of Christianity and the antithesis of the moral philosophy you seem to be advocating.

Let me be clear on the whole might makes right stance I took. Might must be existent in an absolute sense in order to have such a capability. So it is absolute might and thus authority that determine what is right. You posed a very thought provoking question when you asked what it means to be good. Does being good mean being like God or does it mean something entirely different? We know that scriptures tells us "there is no one truly good except One--that is, God."

As far as the moral philosophy I believe in (at this pont in my understanding), it is not in keeping with mainline christianity.
Along this line, I am not much of a supporter of kenosis because of the pagan trinitarian undertones it espouses. Rather than Jesus being he Father, I believe that scripture teaches that he is the embodiment of the Father's purposes and reason for creation as opposed to an incarnation of the Father.
Anyhow, back to the issue of my "philosophy". If I defined it, it would likely be a sort of "stay in your lane" philosophy that defines proper behavior based on whether one does what one is supposed to do and plays the God given role they are given. Acting outside of said role is wrong while abiding in that role is righteous.

Craig.Paardekooper

07-05-2011, 01:25 AM

joel

07-05-2011, 05:14 AM

Different rules of behaviour apply to different species, and we might agree that God is a different "species".

Might we also agree that Christ is creating in Himself a new "species" (creature)........kainos anthropos.

Palaios anthropos (the old humanity) has been dealt with on His cross. We are to embrace the truth of it by faith......otherwise we live and walk in the "old"....no matter how effective we may be "moral", we still fall short, if we see only from old eyes.

Joel

Rose

07-05-2011, 11:00 AM

Every creature that God created has been created for a certain purpose. God's purpose for men is that they should not kill each other without lawful reason but should follow the Golden Rule.

However, God's purpose for other species is different. Spiders were created to spin webs and trap flies. God's purpose for the Preying Mantis is that the female should eat the male after sex. His purposes differ from species to species.

God could just as easily commanded us to behave like Preying Mantises, but He didn't.

God's purposes are usually encoded physically within creatures in the form of reflex, instinct, drive, desire - or in higher animals they might be experienced as motivation towards a goal. Perhaps that is what conscience is.

When we look at the Bible we see the general commands that God gives to ALL people are to do with morality and the promotion of virtue. The laws that God ordains for all people promote virtue.

It is only in specific and unique circumstances that God intervenes and authorises the taking of life - for reasons not apparent to ourselves. But these instances of God intervening into human history are relatively rare.

Different rules of behaviour apply to different species, and we might agree that God is a different "species".

On a semantic level it is probably meaningless to refer to God as Good. But we can say that God's general commandments ordain that we do good and pursue virtue, and that these general commandments are only overruled in special circumstances.

Hi Craig,

Glad to see you stopped in for a visit...:yo:

I have to differ with you on your statement of God's intervention for authorizing and commanding the taking of human life being unique.

Starting in Genesis 6 with God's command to kill all life on earth with the exception of Noah and his family, continuing on to the mass destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Then we read of the authorized death of Egyptians by Yahweh before and during the Exodus, and even the Hebrews themselves did not escape Yahweh's wrath when the 3,000 were killed at Mt. Sinai, and again in 2Sam.24:15 when 70,000 Hebrews were killed because David took a census. From that point on we see many incidences of God commanding the Hebrews to wipe out thousands of people in pagan cities, sometimes keeping only the virgin girls alive.

Deut.7:1-2 When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou; And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them:

All toll we see in the Bible where multiple millions of people were killed by direct authorization of Yahweh...sorry, but that is far from unique!

Rose

Rose

07-05-2011, 11:14 AM

Might we also agree that Christ is creating in Himself a new "species" (creature)........kainos anthropos.

Palaios anthropos (the old humanity) has been dealt with on His cross. We are to embrace the truth of it by faith......otherwise we live and walk in the "old"....no matter how effective we may be "moral", we still fall short, if we see only from old eyes.

Joel

Though it may be a good thing that Jesus tried to redeem the god Yahweh of the Old Testament through his words, that still does not resolve the problem of Jesus equating Yahweh of the Old, with God the Father of the New.

I feel the huge disparity between the Old and New cannot be rectified, the "Father God" portrayed by Jesus is not the warrior god Yahweh, portrayed in the Old Testament. It is like comparing Hitler to Gandhi!

Rose

Rose

07-05-2011, 08:17 PM

CWH

07-06-2011, 03:38 AM

Here is a list of the Top Ten worst accounts of mass killings commanded by the god of the Bible, Yahweh.

1. God commands genocide by sending a Flood to destroy all life on earth in Genesis 7.
2. God commands the mass destruction and slaughter of all the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19.
3. God commands all the first born sons of the Egyptians to be killed along with all those killed in the plagues he sent.
4. God commands 3,000 Hebrews killed at Mt. Sinai for worshiping the Golden Calf (Exo.32:28).
5. God commands 70,000 Hebrews killed because David’s took a census (2Sam.24:15).
6. God commands that the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and the Jebusites (7 nations in all) whom he delivered to the Hebrews to be utterly destroyed (Deut 7:1-2).
7. God commands all the inhabitant of Jabesh-Gilead in Judges 21:11-12 to be slaughtered except 400 virgin girls.
8. God commands all the Midianites in Num.31 to be slaughtered except the virgin girls.
9. God commands all the Amalakites in 1Sam.15:1-8 to be utterly destroyed.
10. God commands Israel to attack and kill all those of the tribe of Benjamin in Judges 20:24-48. Over 43,000 people were killed.

Rose

These are flawed thinking which will only lead to self-arrogance that we are better, kinder and smarter than God.

Foremost, we must understand that we are His creation and therefore God has the power to take life and give life; punish or forgive. God is also fair to all. Sometimes, I believe God "over-do" so as to create fear of punishments or retributions for people's wrong-doings so as to create a more righteous society...afterall, only He can forgive and pardon the wrongdoings of His creatures. I tend to use the analogy of God as a computer maker who has every right to destroy his faulty computers and make new and better computers as he likes from the spare parts and scraps from his faulty computers. I don't see the logic of the computer-maker keeping all his old faulty computers forever in his warehouse and occupying precious space... for what? I also believe that whatever God did was for the good of His own righteous people so that they could enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. Whether those whom He ordered killed will be eventually pardoned is difficult to say as only He has the power to forgive and forget their sins.

I know Rose will jumping in violent protests and fuming at my responses.....as usual :D and she will accuse me of continuing to support God and His "evil doings". Sometimes I do hope that Rose and RAM be not so stubborn and see from other's perspectives. See my reply in Green:

God commands genocide by sending a Flood to destroy all life on earth in Genesis 7.
Don't you want to destroy the whole house if it is beyond repair from termites infestation or continue to live danger of the house collapsing at any time? God destroyed all life on earth by a Flood because as stated in Genesis that the people have become very evil and whatever they did was evil beyond imagination and almost everything was defiled. Imagine living among all your neighbors who would rob, rape, steal, kill and destroy.

2. God commands the mass destruction and slaughter of all the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19.
Imagine living in a society where people would indulge in sex all day long....prostituition, lesbianism, homosexualism, nudism, oral sex, sodomy, rapes, paedophilism, fornications, incests, infested with venereal diseases and AIDS etc. Do you want to live in this society or do you think this society should be destroyed or be allowed to influence others?

3. God commands all the first born sons of the Egyptians to be killed along with all those killed in the plagues he sent.
Merciful God would have done more atrocious things such as killing every Egyptians but He did not....why killed only the first born sons of the Egyptians? In Genesis, we knew that the Egyptians supported the Pharoah so that they could continue to keep God's people under their bondage to serve as slaves, servants etc. and would not let them go despite several warnings from God. So drastic measure was necessary to force them to release God's people. First born sons were valued in those days for several cultural reasons. It's like a government warning its citizen not to murder and despite many warnings and measures but failed, the government finally have to resort to capital punishment for all murderers and their accomplice and all attempted murders so as to stem this crime.Sounds reasonable isn't it?

4. God commands 3,000 Hebrews killed at Mt. Sinai for worshiping the Golden Calf (Exo.32:28).
I believe this was done by God to create fear so that those and those future generations who goes against God will obey His commands. Better to punish a small group of His own people (whom He could forgive at will) than to allow them to influence others of their evil ways and lost their respect and fear of God. Does parents warned and punished their children for their wrongdoings such as robbing, bullying, stealing etc, or allow them to continue indefinitely? Such poor parenting would only make their children lost their respect and fear of their parents and encouraged them into crimes.

5. God commands 70,000 Hebrews killed because David’s took a census (2Sam.24:15).
The main reason was that David have sinned by trusting in his might and not trusting God and a plague killed those 70,000 who probably supported David in his sins and were punished. This was not the first time as indicated by the word "again". Why didn't Merciful God punished the more than a million able-bodied men censured then as well? The sins of David and his supporters were atoned by the building of the alter as obeyed by David which meant that God will forgive and forget their sins ensuring their place in heaven.

6. God commands that the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and the Jebusites (7 nations in all) whom he delivered to the Hebrews to be utterly destroyed (Deut 7:1-2).
Those were evil people who were against God. To kill the evils or be killed by the evils so as to destroy the righteous, which is better? If those evil people were left to live, they will eventually killed the Hebrews and their descendants in revenge. Do good government saved its own citizens first or saved non-citizens first at the expense of its own citizens? Do you save own own children first or do you save other people's children first?

7. God commands all the inhabitant of Jabesh-Gilead in Judges 21:11-12 to be slaughtered except 400 virgin girls.
Drastic measures were necessary to ensure and sustain the genes of God's people. The 400 virgin girls were necessary to ensure first born descendants for God's people. Why didn't God kept those evil young men, mature and productive ladies and young children as well if sex and procreation were His motives? To keep them is suicidal as they will took revenge against God's people and slaughter them and their generations. The evil young men and mature ladies would have competed and resisted against God's people over the virgin women thus defeating the purpose of ensuring God's righteous generations and first borns.

8. God commands all the Midianites in Num.31 to be slaughtered except the virgin girls.
Drastic measures were necessary to ensure and sustain the genes of God's people. The virgin girls were necessary to ensure first born descendants for God's people. Why didn't God kept those evil young men, mature and productive ladies and young children as well if sex and procreation were His motives? To keep them is suicidal as they will took revenge against God's people and slaughter them and their generations. The evil young men and mature ladies would have competed and resisted against God's people over the virgin women thus defeating the purpose of ensuring God's righteous generations and first borns.

9. God commands all the Amalakites in 1Sam.15:1-8 to be utterly destroyed.
Those were evil people that had to be destroyed to ensure the survival of God's righteous people. Whether Merciful God would eventually pardon those killed is an unknown factor.

10. God commands Israel to attack and kill all those of the tribe of Benjamin in Judges 20:24-48. Over 43,000 people were killed.
Those were evil people that had to be destroyed to ensure the survival of God's righteous people. Whether Merciful God would eventually pardon those killed is an unknown factor.

Merciful God will pardon our sins.... amen. :pray:

Rose

07-06-2011, 08:43 AM

These are flawed thinking which will only lead to self-arrogance that we are better, kinder and smarter than God.

Foremost, we must understand that we are His creation and therefore God has the power to take life and give life; punish or forgive. God is also fair to all. Sometimes, I believe God "over-do" so as to create fear of punishments or retributions for people's wrong-doings so as to create a more righteous society...afterall, only He can forgive and pardon the wrongdoings of His creatures. I tend to use the analogy of God as a computer maker who has every right to destroy his faulty computers and make new and better computers as he likes from the spare parts and scraps from his faulty computers. I don't see the logic of the computer-maker keeping all his old faulty computers forever in his warehouse and occupying precious space... for what? I also believe that whatever God did was for the good of His own righteous people so that they could enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. Whether those whom He ordered killed will be eventually pardoned is difficult to say as only He has the power to forgive and forget their sins.

I know Rose will jumping in violent protests and fuming at my responses.....as usual :D and she will accuse me of continuing to support God and His "evil doings". Sometimes I do hope that Rose and RAM be not so stubborn and see from other's perspectives. See my reply in Green:

God commands genocide by sending a Flood to destroy all life on earth in Genesis 7.
Don't you want to destroy the whole house if it is beyond repair from termites infestation or continue to live danger of the house collapsing at any time? God destroyed all life on earth by a Flood because as stated in Genesis that the people have become very evil and whatever they did was evil beyond imagination and almost everything was defiled. Imagine living among all your neighbors who would rob, rape, steal, kill and destroy.
2. God commands the mass destruction and slaughter of all the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19.
Imagine living in a society where people would indulge in sex all day long....prostituition, lesbianism, homosexualism, nudism, oral sex, sodomy, rapes, paedophilism, fornications, incests, infested with venereal diseases and AIDS etc. Do you want to live in this society or do you think this society should be destroyed or be allowed to influence others?
3. God commands all the first born sons of the Egyptians to be killed along with all those killed in the plagues he sent.
Merciful God would have done more atrocious things such as killing every Egyptians but He did not....why killed only the first born sons of the Egyptians? In Genesis, we knew that the Egyptians supported the Pharoah so that they could continue to keep God's people under their bondage to serve as slaves, servants etc. and would not let them go despite several warnings from God. So drastic measure was necessary to force them to release God's people. First born sons were valued in those days for several cultural reasons. It's like a government warning its citizen not to murder and despite many warnings and measures but failed, the government finally have to resort to capital punishment for all murderers and their accomplice and all attempted murders so as to stem this crime.Sounds reasonable isn't it?
4. God commands 3,000 Hebrews killed at Mt. Sinai for worshiping the Golden Calf (Exo.32:28).
I believe this was done by God to create fear so that those and those future generations who goes against God will obey His commands. Better to punish a small group of His own people (whom He could forgive at will) than to allow them to influence others of their evil ways and lost their respect and fear of God. Does parents warned and punished their children for their wrongdoings such as robbing, bullying, stealing etc, or allow them to continue indefinitely? Such poor parenting would only make their children lost their respect and fear of their parents and encouraged them into crimes.
5. God commands 70,000 Hebrews killed because David’s took a census (2Sam.24:15).
The main reason was that David have sinned by trusting in his might and not trusting God and a plague killed those 70,000 who probably supported David in his sins and were punished. This was not the first time as indicated by the word "again". Why didn't Merciful God punished the more than a million able-bodied men censured then as well? The sins of David and his supporters were atoned by the building of the alter as obeyed by David which meant that God will forgive and forget their sins ensuring their place in heaven.
6. God commands that the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and the Jebusites (7 nations in all) whom he delivered to the Hebrews to be utterly destroyed (Deut 7:1-2).
Those were evil people who were against God. To kill the evils or be killed by the evils so as to destroy the righteous, which is better? If those evil people were left to live, they will eventually killed the Hebrews and their descendants in revenge. Do good government saved its own citizens first or saved non-citizens first at the expense of its own citizens? Do you save own own children first or do you save other people's children first?
7. God commands all the inhabitant of Jabesh-Gilead in Judges 21:11-12 to be slaughtered except 400 virgin girls.
Drastic measures were necessary to ensure and sustain the genes of God's people. The 400 virgin girls were necessary to ensure first born descendants for God's people. Why didn't God kept those evil young men, mature and productive ladies and young children as well if sex and procreation were His motives? To keep them is suicidal as they will took revenge against God's people and slaughter them and their generations. The evil young men and mature ladies would have competed and resisted against God's people over the virgin women thus defeating the purpose of ensuring God's righteous generations and first borns.
8. God commands all the Midianites in Num.31 to be slaughtered except the virgin girls.
Drastic measures were necessary to ensure and sustain the genes of God's people. The virgin girls were necessary to ensure first born descendants for God's people. Why didn't God kept those evil young men, mature and productive ladies and young children as well if sex and procreation were His motives? To keep them is suicidal as they will took revenge against God's people and slaughter them and their generations. The evil young men and mature ladies would have competed and resisted against God's people over the virgin women thus defeating the purpose of ensuring God's righteous generations and first borns.
9. God commands all the Amalakites in 1Sam.15:1-8 to be utterly destroyed.
Those were evil people that had to be destroyed to ensure the survival of God's righteous people. Whether Merciful God would eventually pardon those killed is an unknown factor.
10. God commands Israel to attack and kill all those of the tribe of Benjamin in Judges 20:24-48. Over 43,000 people were killed.
Those were evil people that had to be destroyed to ensure the survival of God's righteous people. Whether Merciful God would eventually pardon those killed is an unknown factor.

Merciful God will pardon our sins.... amen. :pray:

First off Cheow, I wish you would quit lying about me and misrepresenting me! I have never written a "violent" protest, nor have I "fumed" at your responses...so, please stop..:stop:
I have seen it from your perspective, remember I was a Christian for over 30 years...then I opened my eyes and allowed myself the freedom to ask hard questions and search out their answers.

All your responses "in green" are pure speculations in defense of God. You have presented no real facts, just words that try and make the slaughter of the innocent sound justified. :eek:

Instead of trying to justify the God of the Bible, why don't you look at what those descriptions of Yahweh are telling you? There is no way a male warrior god, who discriminates against females and delights in killing the innocent could be the intelligent mind that designed the universe! NO WAY!

Rose

CWH

07-06-2011, 09:31 AM

First off Cheow, I wish you would quit lying about me and misrepresenting me! I have never written a "violent" protest, nor have I "fumed" at your responses...so, please stop..:stop:
I have seen it from your perspective, remember I was a Christian for over 30 years...then I opened my eyes and allowed myself the freedom to ask hard questions and search out their answers.

All your responses "in green" are pure speculations in defense of God. You have presented no real facts, just words that try and make the slaughter of the innocent sound justified. :eek:

Instead of trying to justify the God of the Bible, why don't you look at what those descriptions of Yahweh are telling you? There is no way a male warrior god, who discriminates against females and delights in killing the innocent could be the intelligent mind that designed the universe! NO WAY!

Rose

I am also a Christian for 30 years and I never veered from my Futurist belief. God delights in killing innocents? Go and read the Bible! And Please stop lying and saying bad things about God, Stop, please Stop....

Genesis 6:5
The LORD saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. 6 The LORD regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled.

Genesis 18:20
Then the LORD said, 'The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous 21 that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know.'...............
26 The LORD said, 'If I find fifty righteous people in the city of Sodom, I will spare the whole place for their sake.'

Psalm 78:40
How often they rebelled against him in the wilderness and grieved him in the wasteland!

Isaiah 63:10
Yet they rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit. So he turned and became their enemy and he himself fought against them.

Ezekiel 6:9
Then in the nations where they have been carried captive, those who escape will remember me—how I have been grieved by their adulterous hearts, which have turned away from me, and by their eyes, which have lusted after their idols. They will loathe themselves for the evil they have done and for all their detestable practices.

1 Samuel 15:11
'I regret that I have made Saul king, because he has turned away from me and has not carried out my instructions.' Samuel was angry, and he cried out to the LORD all that night.

Was God such a bad God with no compassion and feelings for his creatures? Think again!

May God Mercy, Grace and Peace be with everyone of us, Amen :pray:.

Rose

07-06-2011, 11:01 AM

I am also a Christian for 30 years and I never veered from my Futurist belief. God delights in killing innocents? Go and read the Bible! And Please stop lying and saying bad things about God, Stop, please Stop....

Genesis 6:5
The LORD saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. 6 The LORD regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled.

Genesis 18:20
Then the LORD said, 'The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous 21 that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know.'...............
26 The LORD said, 'If I find fifty righteous people in the city of Sodom, I will spare the whole place for their sake.'

Psalm 78:40
How often they rebelled against him in the wilderness and grieved him in the wasteland!

Isaiah 63:10
Yet they rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit. So he turned and became their enemy and he himself fought against them.

Ezekiel 6:9
Then in the nations where they have been carried captive, those who escape will remember me—how I have been grieved by their adulterous hearts, which have turned away from me, and by their eyes, which have lusted after their idols. They will loathe themselves for the evil they have done and for all their detestable practices.

1 Samuel 15:11
'I regret that I have made Saul king, because he has turned away from me and has not carried out my instructions.' Samuel was angry, and he cried out to the LORD all that night.

Was God such a bad God with no compassion and feelings for his creatures? Think again!

May God Mercy, Grace and Peace be with everyone of us, Amen :pray:.

I am only saying what the Bible says about God!

The Bible says God regretted making humans, so he killed them all in a Flood...that included all the innocent babies and children. Why would the all knowing creator of the universe regret creating humans when he knew exactly what those humans would do? The pathetic thing is that even after God wiped everyone out but Noah and his family – nothing changed – people are just as wicked now as they ever were! The same goes for all the other killings in the Bible…it changed nothing, the Jews continued in their wicked ways and the pagans continued in their wicked ways. Even after Jesus came and died on the cross, nothing changed…people continued on in their wicked ways. Killing solves nothing!

Why is the shedding of innocent animal blood a sweet smelling aroma to God? It always seemed barbaric to me, I just never felt I could openly say that. It’s one thing to kill animals to eat, but why would 'God' be pleased with the smell of the innocent blood of the animals he created?

Exo.29:41 And the other lamb thou shalt offer at even, and shalt do thereto according to the meat offering of the morning, and according to the drink offering thereof, for a sweet savour, an offering made by fire unto the LORD.

Lev.1:9 But his inwards and his legs shall he wash in water: and the priest shall burn all on the altar, to be a burnt sacrifice, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD.
Lev.23:18 And ye shall offer with the bread seven lambs without blemish of the first year, and one young bullock, and two rams: they shall be for a burnt offering unto the LORD, with their meat offering, and their drink offerings, even an offering made by fire, of sweet savour unto the LORD.

Rose

joel

07-07-2011, 05:28 AM

Rose

07-07-2011, 08:54 AM

God chooses to reveal both His indignation towards sin (not just sins, the acts of individuals), and, His mercy, which far exceeds His indignation.

Both are necessary in the revelation that He provides.

One of the on-going problems concerning our views of God is that the revelation of the indignation is blown far out of proportion when we ascribe a permanence to His wrath and describe it as final and "everlasting".

Another problem is when we look at the "innocence" of a victim and ascribe a sense of unfairness towards God if He displays in that victim His wrath.

Fact is, He chooses the vessels.....as to what purpose He has for each. One is a vessel of indignation. The other is a vessel of mercy. It is God's choice.

If we assert that such is not fair, nor proper, then, we are judging God, His motives and His acts.

If the destruction of a vessel of indignation is thought to be permanent, then, we strenthen our wrong argument against God because the "punishment" far outweighs the "sacrifice".

The delay in the revelation of His destruction of the vessels of wrath demonstrates His "longsuffering" which carries a far greater weigth of glory that any single previous act which He may have carried out in times past upon seemingly "innocent" victims.

He is going to call all forth from the dead and cause them to see His glory regardless of what role they may have played in their lives.

When you judge an act of God as being unjust, you are being a judge of God, and His law, and not a doer of the law. That is the same place that the Jews found themselves when Christ first appeared 2,000 years ago.

Joel

Hi Joel,

Where you and I differ is on the idea of judging God. After much in-depth study I have come to a solid conclusion the God of the Bible, who I am judging, is a warrior god constructed from the minds of men.

I am not judging the "intelligent mind" that designed the universe, but rather a mythological god made up from an inherited mindset of bronze age man. This has been proved to me over and over again as I flip through the pages of Scripture. Everywhere I look I see male-bias and masculine attributes given to Yahweh, I see inequality of women based solely on gender and misuse of power given to men by men. War and killing is rampant throughout the Old Testament along with the sexual exploitation of women...these are aggressive masculine behaviors that the god of the Bible is promoting. These are just a few of the reasons that I can no longer believe Yahweh is the creator of the universe.

Rose

joel

07-07-2011, 09:06 AM

Rose,
Are you now viewing "sin" as also a part of the "mythology" of the Bible? Is this also, in your view, a man-made concept?

Joel

CWH

07-07-2011, 09:10 AM

I am only saying what the Bible says about God!

The Bible says God regretted making humans, so he killed them all in a Flood...that included all the innocent babies and children. Why would the all knowing creator of the universe regret creating humans when he knew exactly what those humans would do? The pathetic thing is that even after God wiped everyone out but Noah and his family – nothing changed – people are just as wicked now as they ever were! The same goes for all the other killings in the Bible…it changed nothing, the Jews continued in their wicked ways and the pagans continued in their wicked ways. Even after Jesus came and died on the cross, nothing changed…people continued on in their wicked ways. Killing solves nothing!

Why is the shedding of innocent animal blood a sweet smelling aroma to God? It always seemed barbaric to me, I just never felt I could openly say that. It’s one thing to kill animals to eat, but why would “God” be pleased with the smell of the innocent blood of the animals he created?

Exo.29:41 And the other lamb thou shalt offer at even, and shalt do thereto according to the meat offering of the morning, and according to the drink offering thereof, for a sweet savour, an offering made by fire unto the LORD.

Lev.1:9 But his inwards and his legs shall he wash in water: and the priest shall burn all on the altar, to be a burnt sacrifice, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD.
Lev.23:18 And ye shall offer with the bread seven lambs without blemish of the first year, and one young bullock, and two rams: they shall be for a burnt offering unto the LORD, with their meat offering, and their drink offerings, even an offering made by fire, of sweet savour unto the LORD.

Rose

ANother of her flawed thinking again as usual.Do you think God desired those sacrificial food? No of course. He desired and is pleased with the offerings of righteous people and people who honor, love and obey God. It's like someone who offered you a gift; it is not the gift that matters but the friendship, appreciation and thought that matters. I knew about those passages decades ago and it says nothing about the Barbaric acts of God. Read the Bible!:

Proverbs 15:8
The LORD detests the sacrifice of the wicked, but the prayer of the upright pleases him.

Proverbs 21:3
To do what is right and just is more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice.

Proverbs 21:27
The sacrifice of the wicked is detestable— how much more so when brought with evil intent!

Hosea 6:6
For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings.

Hosea 8:13
Though they offer sacrifices as gifts to me, and though they eat the meat, the LORD is not pleased with them. Now he will remember their wickedness and punish their sins: They will return to Egypt.

Hosea 9:4
They will not pour out wine offerings to the LORD, nor will their sacrifices please him. Such sacrifices will be to them like the bread of mourners; all who eat them will be unclean. This food will be for themselves; it will not come into the temple of the LORD.

1 Samuel 15:22
But Samuel replied: “Does the LORD delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as much as in obeying the LORD? To obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed is better than the fat of rams.

The Bible says God regretted making humans, so he killed them all in a Flood...that included all the innocent babies and children. Why would the all knowing creator of the universe regret creating humans when he knew exactly what those humans would do? The pathetic thing is that even after God wiped everyone out but Noah and his family – nothing changed – people are just as wicked now as they ever were! The same goes for all the other killings in the Bible…it changed nothing, the Jews continued in their wicked ways and the pagans continued in their wicked ways. Even after Jesus came and died on the cross, nothing changed…people continued on in their wicked ways. Killing solves nothing!
Killing of evil people makes this world a more secure place than it was in the olden days. God always test people as He desired righteous people for His kingdom of heavens. This is what all the parables of Jesus was all about gathering of the wheat and tares, goats and sheep etc. The earth is God's farmland for righteous people.

Praise God, Glorify Him!

Rose

07-07-2011, 11:35 AM

Killing of evil people makes this world a more secure place than it was in the olden days. God always test people as He desired righteous people for His kingdom of heavens. This is what all the parables of Jesus was all about gathering of the wheat and tares, goats and sheep etc. The earth is God's farmland for righteous people.

Praise God, Glorify Him!

For all the massive killing by God of so called "evil" people, the world has just as many wicked people in it as it did 4,000 years ago! :eek:

Killing all the people on earth except Noah and his family didn't help rid the world of evil people. If one thinks that mankind started over with righteous Noah and his family then I guess God's plan didn't work to rid the earth of wickedness...:confused: oooops! Where did all those wicked pagans come from anyway????

All the Best,
Rose

CWH

07-08-2011, 08:04 AM

For all the massive killing by God of so called "evil" people, the world has just as many wicked people in it as it did 4,000 years ago! :eek:

Killing all the people on earth except Noah and his family didn't help rid the world of evil people. If one thinks that mankind started over with righteous Noah and his family then I guess God's plan didn't work to rid the earth of wickedness...:confused: oooops! Where did all those wicked pagans come from anyway????

All the Best,
Rose

Humans are naturally skewed towards evil. None of us can be 100% pure and righteous even with the 8 people that survived the Great Flood. And thus some of their offspring will become evil. Just like in manufactured products. not every manufactured product can be 100% perfect; there will be some rejects. And since a person's personality is developed based on parental genes and interactions with the environment, it does change accordingly. Thus every person is unique, each with their unique personality. There is of course the possibility of Satan introducing evil into humans as noted in the parable of the weeds and in the "sons of God" of Genesis 4.

The parable of the weeds:

Matt 13:24-30; 36-43
He set another parable before them, saying,
"The Kingdom of Heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field,
but while people slept,
his enemy came and sowed darnel also among the wheat, and went away.
But when the blade sprang up and brought forth fruit, then the darnel appeared also.

The servants of the householder came and said to him,
‘Sir, didn’t you sow good seed in your field?
Where did this darnel come from?’
"He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’
"The servants asked him, ‘Do you want us to go and gather them up?’
"But he said, ‘No, lest perhaps while you gather up the darnel,
you root up the wheat with them.
Let both grow together until the harvest,
and in the harvest time I will tell the reapers,

"First, gather up the darnel, and bind them in bundles to burn them;
but gather the wheat into my barn."‘"

Lord deliver us from the evil one, Amen :pray:

Rose

07-08-2011, 08:37 AM

Humans are naturally skewed towards evil. None of us can be 100% pure and righteous even with the 8 people that survived the Great Flood. And thus some of their offspring will become evil. Just like in manufactured products. not every manufactured product can be 100% perfect; there will be some rejects. And since a person's personality is developed based on parental genes and interactions with the environment, it does change accordingly. Thus every person is unique, each with their unique personality. There is of course the possibility of Satan introducing evil into humans as noted in the parable of the weeds and in the "sons of God" of Genesis 4.

The parable of the weeds:

Matt 13:24-30; 36-43
He set another parable before them, saying,
"The Kingdom of Heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field,
but while people slept,
his enemy came and sowed darnel also among the wheat, and went away.
But when the blade sprang up and brought forth fruit, then the darnel appeared also.

The servants of the householder came and said to him,
‘Sir, didn’t you sow good seed in your field?
Where did this darnel come from?’
"He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’
"The servants asked him, ‘Do you want us to go and gather them up?’
"But he said, ‘No, lest perhaps while you gather up the darnel,
you root up the wheat with them.
Let both grow together until the harvest,
and in the harvest time I will tell the reapers,

"First, gather up the darnel, and bind them in bundles to burn them;
but gather the wheat into my barn."‘"

Lord deliver us from the evil one, Amen :pray:

You are comparing God to a fallible human manufacturer...God isn't supposed to make mistakes, especially with human lives!

If mankind was going to just turn evil again after the flood, then why wipe them out in the first place? It sure seems like there were a lot of lives that got wasted by God's trial and error! :eek:

All the Best,
Rose

joel

07-08-2011, 08:47 AM

Rose,
Are you now viewing "sin" as also a part of the "mythology" of the Bible? Is this also, in your view, a man-made concept?

Joel

Rose, I would appreciate a reply. Just a simple answer will do. Thanks,
Joel

CWH

07-08-2011, 09:05 AM

You are comparing God to a fallible human manufacturer...God isn't supposed to make mistakes, especially with human lives!

If mankind was going to just turn evil again after the flood, then why wipe them out in the first place? It sure seems like there were a lot of lives that got wasted by God's trial and error! :eek:

All the Best,
Rose

God is using the earth as a farmland for righteous souls for His Kingdom of Heaven as stated in the parable of the weeds. Think about it, the Flood came about 1,500 biblical years after the creation of Adam and Eve and humans have turned so evil that God had no choice and felt so sorry to destroy all land life on earth....just 1,500 years and the earth has become so evil, imagine what it would be like if God had not do anything for the next 1,500 years! It's like currently what US has done by slowly destroying terrorist groups to wipe them out if possible, if not to prevent them from growing so fast and significantly. The Great Flood and the breeding from the 8 righteous seeds of Noah slows down the rate of evil which would have easily overwhelmed the earth within 1,500 years. And as stated in the parable of the weeds, God will come back one day and gather the good and destroy the bad.

Seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness...Amen. :pray:

CWH

07-08-2011, 09:19 AM

Rose, I would appreciate a reply. Just a simple answer will do. Thanks,
Joel

Is sin a man-made concept? That's a very intelligent question joel! :thumb: I guess Rose needs more time to answer or perhaps trying to evade your question :D. Why are we waiting?....why are we waiting?....

May God's Blessing, Peace and Mercy be with you joel and with everyone of us, Amen.:pray:

Rose

07-08-2011, 08:42 PM

http://biblewheel.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?p=33110#post33110)
Rose,
Are you now viewing "sin" as also a part of the "mythology" of the Bible? Is this also, in your view, a man-made concept?

Joel

Rose, I would appreciate a reply. Just a simple answer will do. Thanks,
Joel

Hi Joel,

Yes, I believe the idea of "sin" was a man-made concept...since the Bible was formed from human ideas, sin falls into the category of being invented by men.

Rose

Rose

07-08-2011, 08:46 PM

Is sin a man-made concept? That's a very intelligent question joel! :thumb: I guess Rose needs more time to answer or perhaps trying to evade your question :D. Why are we waiting?....why are we waiting?....

May God's Blessing, Peace and Mercy be with you joel and with everyone of us, Amen.:pray:
That's not being very nice Cheow. :p I am not trying to evade Joel's question...the fact of the matter is that I have been away from my computer all day and just now sat down to answer posts.

For future reference it is best not to jump to hastily to conclusions.:p

All the best,
Rose

joel

07-09-2011, 05:04 AM

Rose

07-09-2011, 08:45 AM

Rose, since in your opinion, sin is a man-made myth, and, the accounts in the gospels are also exaggerations concerning Jesus, since He was just a man, then, His resurrection must also be a myth. Is this also your view?

Joel

Hi Joel,

My search for truth has led me to the conclusion that the Bible contains stories and myths made up from the minds of men, consequently the story of the resurrection of Jesus also falls into that classification.

1. There is no reliable historical data to confirm the resurrection story.
2. The God of the Bible is portrayed as a male-biased, masculine war god, who changes his mind, makes mistakes and commands moral abominations.

I believe Jesus was a righteous teacher who promoted equality of all races and genders and for that he was killed. The Jews believed that God had an hierarchic order of gender and race, and Jesus called himself equal with and the offspring of God, which was blasphemous...the penalty for that was death. Whether or not Jesus was an actual man or a made-up myth the story of his life and death clearly shows the mind-set of men and how they perceived "God" in a very masculine and rigid manner.

All the Best,
Rose

Richard Amiel McGough

07-10-2011, 08:27 AM

Rose,
Are you now viewing "sin" as also a part of the "mythology" of the Bible? Is this also, in your view, a man-made concept?

Joel
I want to chime in on this one. Even during my years as a Christian, I was disturbed by the Biblical concepts of sin and righteousness. It never made any sense to say that the "Law" was the "form of knowledge and the truth" (Rom 2:20). The Law is filled with all sorts of arbitrary minutiae about rituals and sacrifices that have absolutely nothing to do with anything like righteousness or goodness. What is the "law" of which Paul spoke when he said that good Gentiles " do by nature the things contained in the law" (Rom 2:14)?

The concept of "sin" appears to be a built-in aspect of human social psychology. We find it in most if not all human cultures in one form or another. It's specific content is largely arbitrary. For example, Jews and Muslims think it's a "sin" to eat pork but Christians love the stuff. So sin has nothing to do with objective "goodness" per se. And I believe the concept can be and should be rejected. It's all just made up. It is an old and invalid "explanation" for why there is suffering in the world and why God seems so mad at us. It is the central and original myth of the Bible - Adam and Eve sinned and caused everyone in the whole world to become sinners. Hanky Panky says that if this is not true, then there is no need for a savior and Christ did not have to die and Christianity should be rejected. So according to many of its most "able" defenders, Christianity stands or falls with the concept of "universal sinfulness of humanity." I agree, and that's another reason why I reject the traditional Christian doctrines. There was no Adam and Eve. There was no flood. Those things are obviously myths from a literal historical point of view.