Could God commit suicide?

[Vegeta897]

I can't believe they bought Jesus back in the sequel.

You mean brought, right?

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?p=2838745#post2838745

lulz

Oh coincidences.

 

[delusional]

Jesus broke the old covenant.

Point being?

God does not do evil, but he does things that may be perceived by us as evil.

Why would God create humans with a moral compass that goes against Gods Moral Compass?

 

[jet_porkins]

Read Jeremiah 31:27-34, this prophecy is pretty much the basis of the new covenant and the New Testament, but not every aspect of the prophecy has been fulfilled, therefore we would still be under the old covenant.

Which part isn't true? Specifics, please. I'm not trying to be a jerk, I'm just trying to fully understand your position.

 

[CrazyHarij]

To summarise: God is perfect, and we are merely flawed images that find fault with stuff because we suck.

yeah pretty much

Point being?

we live under the new covenant with the only requisite being accepting jesus as lord and savior

Why would God create humans with a moral compass that goes against Gods Moral Compass?

I'm more interested in why god would create humans at all.

vegeta: m-m-monster kill

 

[Higlac]

Yes. That was Jesus' whole purpose.

P.S., he doesn't die. Sorry to spoil the ending for you.

Uh... yeah... I spent 4 years in a Catholic High School, I know exactly what happens.

Spoiler

In the last bit, two lamps can talk.

 

[jet_porkins]

Uh... yeah... I spent 4 years in a Catholic High School, I know exactly what happens.

Spoiler

In the last bit, two lamps can talk.

I wasn't sure how you came off as. I don't know your background. Internet ftl.

 

[Higlac]

lol, I'm probably the most conservative, right wing, Catholic person on this forum, but I like to keep it quiet, since most people here aren't.

 

[Jintor]

You mean brought, right?

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?p=2838745#post2838745

lulz

Oh coincidences.

Bought.

It turns out Jesus didn't die when he was crucified, but instead he was secretly stolen by an evil underground organization and taken far away and immersed in a Lazerus Pit, whereupon he escaped and had many whacky adventures until he wound up in the Slave Markets of somewhere or the other, where he was found, identified, and bought by our protagonists.

 

[Vegeta897]

Well that's what I get for just jumping into a thread.

A religion-related thread no less.

 

[delusional]

Which part isn't true? Specifics, please. I'm not trying to be a jerk, I'm just trying to fully understand your position.

Verse 31 and 32 tells us that the new covenant will be made with the house of Judah and the house of Israel, but during the time of Jesus both houses weren't in existence. And even if they were together, this covenant is being made with the Hebrews, not the gentiles. There is also many other verses that tell what happens specifically when both houses are brought together during this time, such as no more famines or death at a young age.

Verse 33, can be assumed fulfilled, albeit interpretations of what this means can differ, such as whether this results in the loss of free will, or that it is the indwelling of the holy spirit in a believer.

Verse 34 tells us that there will be universal knowledge of God, not in the sense that everyone has knowledge of the Hebrew God, but in that they truly believe in this God.

This is basically the gist of it, I can be more specific if need be. I was intentionally vague at first, just because I'd rather people read a verse and draw their own conclusions. Sorry about that.

 

[Reflex]

I guess not....:hmph:

 

[jet_porkins]

Verse 31 and 32 tells us that the new covenant will be made with the house of Judah and the house of Israel, but during the time of Jesus both houses weren't in existence. And even if they were together, this covenant is being made with the Hebrews, not the gentiles. There is also many other verses that tell what happens specifically when both houses are brought together during this time, such as no more famines or death at a young age.

Verse 33, can be assumed fulfilled, albeit interpretations of what this means can differ, such as whether this results in the loss of free will, or that it is the indwelling of the holy spirit in a believer.

Verse 34 tells us that there will be universal knowledge of God, not in the sense that everyone has knowledge of the Hebrew God, but in that they truly believe in this God.

This is basically the gist of it, I can be more specific if need be. I was intentionally vague at first, just because I'd rather people read a verse and draw their own conclusions. Sorry about that.

In regards to being inclusive of all people, not just Hebrews, the book of Galatians clears that up quite clearly:

3:28: There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free man, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

29: And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's descendants, heirs according to promise.

So while the initial words were spoken to Jews, we are adopted into that promise in Christ Jesus.

Also, regarding the house of Judah, Jesus is a descendant of the tribe of Judah. Jesus is called The Lion from the tribe of Judah, the root of David in Rev 5:5.

Yes, we see v. 34 happening even now. While people claim to not "believe" in Him, that doesn't mean their ignorant of His will for human lives. Even the most common of atheists knows that the God they claim to disbelieve supposedly loves them. Atheists I've spoken with say they don't believe in God because of certain rules some scripture writes about for gender roles. That has nothing to do with the existence or nonexistence of God, only that they disagree with what the scripture says.

I don't pretend to know all of the answers. For instance, children in 3rd world countries who die before they hear the name Jesus translated into their language. I don't know what happens to them. I don't know why God needs angels. I'm no well-knowledged person when it comes to these paradoxical or quote/unquote "counter-intuitive" topics. All I know that I need to know is that I'm adopted into the new covenant, and that He's real. That's not even mentioning the miracles I've experienced that solidify that belief.

 

[Eejit]

Why would God create humans with a moral compass that goes against Gods Moral Compass?

Human's aren't created with a moral compass, we develop it as we are reared.

 

[Farrowlesparrow]

Don't tell me you missed the funeral? We had a wake in heaven that was quite the party...

 

[Eejit]

Easy for you to say. That Seraph turned out to have crabs
She was damn hot, but crabs...

 

[NeptuneUK]

Pi wouldn't commit suicide.

 

[G(ordon)-man]

There is no God, ergo he cannot kill himself.

 

[Iron Kat]

Stupid poll. IMO.

EDIT: I'm not calling the OP stupid, I just think this is a ridiculous question.

I agree, but I voted no anyway.

 

[Rizzo]

No he can't. I already killed him.

 

[Shift]

God Thread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Run For Your Lives!!!!!!

 

[Sir Phoenixx]

There was a magical tree in an imaginary forest, and the magical tree fell. If there was no one around to hear it would it make a sound?

 

[CptStern]

could god create a booger soooo big that even he couldnt pick it?

could god squeeze out a turd sooo big that it would rip the fabric of the space time continuum causing a ripple effect that would destroy whole universes?

could god create another equally powerful god (shared omnipotency), have sex with said god, and 9 months later a little god is born/hatched/beamed aboard the starship?

 

[theotherguy]

You're throwing extraneous hypothetics. It's not a question about the limits of our freedom, or "how free we are," since we already possess total free choice, according to the Christian God. Depending on your choice - since according to God there's a right and wrong choice - you reap what you sow. That's what we're establishing here.

I am saying that the choice to do evil is not a pre-requisite for free will. We could freely choose only good things and still be free. Therefore, God does not have to allow evil to give us free will.

Furthermore, God is supposed to have created us. He is supposed to have created each and every one of us with a plan and purpose. If he did this, he would surely know of the evil acts we would commit. Why punish someone for something when you yourself created them to do just that thing? If God despises evil in the world, why not fill it with only good people?

You presume to know what God should and shouldn't do. Isn't that up to God? That's exactly what the first sin was: eating from the tree of good and evil, deciding for yourself what is right and wrong.

The general idea is that God is supposed to be a supremely rational being. The idea is that God's actions should be justified by his supreme rationality, not by his arbitrary command. If you declare that God's arbitrary command justifies his own actions, then you have declared God to be irrational and unethical, and all further moral justifications based on those commands become irrational and unethical. You cannot appeal to the authority of God to justify morality, for God is contradictory, even in the Bible.

Interpretations of the Bible vary, as do interpretations of God. Furthermore, there are many different possible god's all with contradictory commands. Therefore, we cannot rely on the commands of a God to justify morality without being totally arbitrary. This is why we use reason to develop theories of ethics. Ideally, if God were supremely rational and supremely good, his theory of ethics would be based on reason as well.

Not to dodge the question, but debating why or why not he gave us X amount of choice doesn't prove or disprove his existence. The fact of the matter is, the burden of choice is on us. Keep in mind, it was a supra-world force that made this world "all aleak" as the poet ee cummings puts it. The world was made without sin. When Adam and Eve first took breath, the world was free from all evil. They listened to a fallen angel, a deceitful voice. But the point is, there's a choice here and now. Forget what you think should have been. This doesn't prove or disprove anything.

Certainly, but it does show belief in a supremely good, supremely rational, supremely powerful and all-knowing God to be irrational. Observing the world as it is today reveals this notion to be totally absurd. No being can be all of these and still allow evil in the world.

We still haven't covered natural evils either. Consider the universe as a whole. It is a completely inhospitable place. Almost all of the universe would kill you within minutes if you were to go there. Even our little island of life is bombarded with cosmic radiation, and is in constant threat of destruction by asteroids. Earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes and floods kill millions. Viruses, bacteria, parasites and other living creatures kill still more people. Fires, volcanic eruptions, droughts, famines, locusts, and a whole host of other maladies continually destroy the human race.

Now consider, if God has the ability to stop all of these from happening, why doesn't he? If he were supremely good, he would certainly want to. If he were all powerful, he would be able to, if he were all knowing, he would know they were happening. Tell me, why would God allow children to be born without lungs to die within seconds? Why would God allow cholera to sweep through South Africa and kill millions for no reason? Why would God leave the entire universe a barren, desolate, inhospitable place?

Again, see above example. You're right. An all-good being would do everything in its power to create good. That's what He did. That's what He said after every creation. "It is good." And to this day, his plans for those that choose to follow Him are for the purposes of good, not for evil. Jeremiah 29:11-13, read it sometime.

This is essentially "the world is the best of all possible worlds" argument. Is the world good? Just look at it, damnit! Just look at the needless destruction, the needless suffering, the evil, the corruption, the insanity of it! If God thought the world was for the best, he was a sick, sadistic bastard. If he decided the world would be horrid except for a tiny tiny set of "chosen," then he is the most malevolent, evil creature ever to exist.

 

[Gordon-Shepherd]

I think he could do it, but it would be a dick move on his part. I'd rather he kill us all first so we don't all just die for nothing
like completely kill us, I mean

 

[Druckles]

Yes; he already has.

 

[jet_porkins]

I am saying that the choice to do evil is not a pre-requisite for free will. We could freely choose only good things and still be free. Therefore, God does not have to allow evil to give us free will.

Furthermore, God is supposed to have created us. He is supposed to have created each and every one of us with a plan and purpose. If he did this, he would surely know of the evil acts we would commit. Why punish someone for something when you yourself created them to do just that thing? If God despises evil in the world, why not fill it with only good people?

To the first question, God does create everyone for a life of good, and not for evil, when we choose to follow and trust him. When we choose to do evil and decide to not follow and trust Him, we go against that promise. He never created us to do the evil that humans do, but humans do them anyway because they'd rather ignore God. Needless to say, that goes back to the choice we have.

As to the second question, EVERY person is born with the above mentioned promises for a plan of goodness in life. But not everyone chooses to follow that plan.

The idea is that God's actions should be justified by his supreme rationality, not by his arbitrary command. If you declare that God's arbitrary command justifies his own actions, then you have declared God to be irrational and unethical, and all further moral justifications based on those commands become irrational and unethical.

God's command to follow and live the life He promises us for good is not arbitrary or unreasonable. Either live for the best life you could possibly live, or live life making your own decisions, your own path, blind to the future. God sees your whole life right before his very eyes, where you - along with the rest of the planet - has no idea what will happen a minute from now. Logically, if you had two decisions before you: walk through a mile of tremendous, thick fog, blind to what's an inch in front of you, or walk through that same fog with someone who sees that entire mile of obstacles, so you trust them to get you out of the fog, what would you pick? Walking in the fog yourself leads to stumbling, physical and spiritual. It hardens you. The latter option provides the opposite.

Therefore, we cannot rely on the commands of a God to justify morality without being totally arbitrary. This is why we use reason to develop theories of ethics. Ideally, if God were supremely rational and supremely good, his theory of ethics would be based on reason as well.

It's in my understanding that a pre-existing God who created mankind, created morality as we know it. Man wasn't created, and then thought amongst themselves "well, I think this is rational morality, and this is irrational morality. Let's put this into law." The biblical God created the fundamental laws of morality (stealing, lying, killing, etc). These laws have transcended throughout modern civilizations and they have adapted them into their own laws. Would murder be illegal if God hadn't said it was evil? Who knows?

No being can be all of these and still allow evil in the world.

I disagree. He hates it, but he chooses to show mercy. Argue this point all you want, this is the only response I'll give you: God's mercy. He'll eradicate those who pursue evil in the last days of the earth with His wrath, when all of those that even have a heart to listen and obey him are persecuted off the face of the earth. Then he'll wipe them out. Is that the kind of judgment you were looking for?

God loves and cares about ALL of His creations. He'll never hate any of them, even if they do despicable actions. People who live for themselves and by themselves will see God's judgment for themselves when they die.

This is essentially "the world is the best of all possible worlds" argument. Is the world good? Just look at it, damnit! Just look at the needless destruction, the needless suffering, the evil, the corruption, the insanity of it! If God thought the world was for the best, he was a sick, sadistic bastard. If he decided the world would be horrid except for a tiny tiny set of "chosen," then he is the most malevolent, evil creature ever to exist.

No, there is much evil in this world. That is the act of mankind, not God, as I've stated already. He didn't decide the world to be horrid for people, people decided they wanted it to be horrid for themselves. This argument once again blames God for our own transgressions. God has mercy enough on mankind to give us all a choice to follow His promises for us, or not. We will always have a choice to turn to Him throughout our entire life. You've probably done some amoral things as well. NOTE: I do NOT presume to know you or your life at all, but you've probably lied, you may have lusted after people, you've probably bent a few of the moral rules that you claim to be set up by reason. You've probably never killed a person before, and will never start a genocide, but you'd want God to spare you if you pursue dishonesty and lustful desires, wouldn't you? Those are amoral.

My point is that we always have a choice, and we don't only have one shot at choosing right. You can throw all the paradoxes you want at me. All it does for me is to solidify my feeling that people are just looking for excuses to claim there is no God. I have a hard time believing atheism really exists. If I pushed you off a cliff, what will you scream all the way down? What would you be thinking? Would you still want to disbelieve in a power that saves half-way down the fall, or would you then start to hope?

But that's an entirely different discussion.

I don't know all the answers. I don't have answers to your paradoxes. Nobody in the world can pretend to know all the answers to questions that challenge human logic concerning God. All I know is, I have experienced Him, I have felt His presence, I have seen his miracles, and I'm a completely changed person than what I used to be. If that's not enough to believe, then I don't know what is.

The discussion is now going in circles.

Also, God is not a creature.

 

[Omnomnick]

Most probably.

 

[Jintor]

All it does for me is to solidify my feeling that people are just looking for excuses to claim there is no God. I have a hard time believing atheism really exists. If I pushed you off a cliff, what will you scream all the way down? What would you be thinking? Would you still want to disbelieve in a power that saves half-way down the fall, or would you then start to hope?

Merely because I am an irrational being does not make me right.

 

[jet_porkins]

Merely because I am an irrational being does not make me right.

That's inarguable.

 

[Sheepo]

I love when wacky poll threads turn into philosophical religious debates.

 

[PriNcE oF SpAcE]

would require him to be there in the first place.

 

[theotherguy]

To the first question, God does create everyone for a life of good, and not for evil, when we choose to follow and trust him. When we choose to do evil and decide to not follow and trust Him, we go against that promise. He never created us to do the evil that humans do, but humans do them anyway because they'd rather ignore God. Needless to say, that goes back to the choice we have.

This makes no sense at all. You are again asserting that God has no control over our minds and actions, which makes him limited in power. If he can control our actions towards good, and wants to control our actions towards good, then he would. Since God is supposedly unlimited in power, and unlimited in his desire to produce good, it would be impossible for evil to exist. Do you see what I am saying? An unlimited being makes no compromises.

As to the second question, EVERY person is born with the above mentioned promises for a plan of goodness in life. But not everyone chooses to follow that plan.

But God knows that they will not "follow that plan," so he essentially promised them nothing. If God knows EXACTLY what the person is going to do, then there is simply no CHOICE in the matter, it means that god made you to be evil if you were evil, and INTENDED you to do evil. This is the kind of stuff that happens when you invent all-powerful deities that also create individuals. How can God possibly "promise" you anything that doesn't turn out to be true? God knows exactly what you will do, when you will do it, and why. He knows you will do X and "not follow the plan" and in fact, he made you do it.

God's command to follow and live the life He promises us for good is not arbitrary or unreasonable. Either live for the best life you could possibly live, or live life making your own decisions, your own path, blind to the future. God sees your whole life right before his very eyes, where you - along with the rest of the planet - has no idea what will happen a minute from now. Logically, if you had two decisions before you: walk through a mile of tremendous, thick fog, blind to what's an inch in front of you, or walk through that same fog with someone who sees that entire mile of obstacles, so you trust them to get you out of the fog, what would you pick? Walking in the fog yourself leads to stumbling, physical and spiritual. It hardens you. The latter option provides the opposite.

What the **** is this supposed to mean? So you assert that god really does have a reason for making arbitrary commands about morality? In that case, we can determine these through reason as well. I'm not discussing this bullshit about a "personal god", I'm talking about the creator of the universe.

And again, this argument is hideously bad, because God knows EXACTLY what decision you will make. He knows if you will decide to "walk your own path" and since he MADE you, HE decided that you would do this to begin with. There is absolutely no choice in the matter. All powerful beings and free will cannot co-exist.

It's in my understanding that a pre-existing God who created mankind, created morality as we know it. Man wasn't created, and then thought amongst themselves "well, I think this is rational morality, and this is irrational morality. Let's put this into law." The biblical God created the fundamental laws of morality (stealing, lying, killing, etc). These laws have transcended throughout modern civilizations and they have adapted them into their own laws. Would murder be illegal if God hadn't said it was evil? Who knows?

Well, there are alot of very good reasons to challenge all of these nonsensical assertions, but since I am playing the devil's advocate and assuming that God exists here (we are talking about the Problem of Evil) I will avoid pointing out your ethical pitfalls. After all, even animals have an ingrained sense of morality derived from kin selection and group-selection altruism. Humans had "morality" long before they had religion, yet humans only developed "ethics" within the last few thousand years.

And again, divine command is no place from which to derive morality. I hope you can see this, that divine command is arbitrary. There are thousands upon thousands of gods that you can possibly choose from, and all provide some sort of moral framework loosely based on our ingrained, animal sense of morality. Yet they all contradict each other. Choosing Yaweh's commands over Allah's over Thor's is an arbitrary choice, not derived from reason.

Why is your morality any more right than the morality of Woden? Why should you believe the morality of Baptists over Jesuits? They are all different, and all assert to be the true derivation of "God's word." But which God? Which version? Which time period? Choosing any one in particular is an arbitrary decision, which is where I derive "any theory of ethics based on divine command is arbitrary and irrational"

If you supplement your divine command with real reasons, all you have done is created an unnecessary middle-man in the process. Your divine commands are justified by real, external reasons, so why not justify morality itself by real, external reasons?

If your divine command is not supplemented with real reasons, then you are simply following the commands of one possible dictator over another without any regard for what is truly right or wrong.

I disagree. He hates it, but he chooses to show mercy. Argue this point all you want, this is the only response I'll give you: God's mercy. He'll eradicate those who pursue evil in the last days of the earth with His wrath, when all of those that even have a heart to listen and obey him are persecuted off the face of the earth. Then he'll wipe them out. Is that the kind of judgment you were looking for?

No,no,NO.

Okay, God created these people to begin with. He knew they would do evil. He created Hitler, Stalin, and Charles Manson all with the will and INTENTION of them doing evil. If God "hated" evil, and was also all-powerful, he not only would WANT to stop these people form being born in the first place, he would HAVE to stop these people form being born. If he didn't, then he is NOT all-good, if he couldn't, then he is NOT all-powerful. This is the central problem of evil, which you still have not answered.

God loves and cares about ALL of His creations. He'll never hate any of them, even if they do despicable actions. People who live for themselves and by themselves will see God's judgment for themselves when they die.

Yes, by burning people forever for transgressions that he MADE them TO do.

No, there is much evil in this world. That is the act of mankind, not God, as I've stated already. He didn't decide the world to be horrid for people, people decided they wanted it to be horrid for themselves. This argument once again blames God for our own transgressions. God has mercy enough on mankind to give us all a choice to follow His promises for us, or not. We will always have a choice to turn to Him throughout our entire life. You've probably done some amoral things as well. NOTE: I do NOT presume to know you or your life at all, but you've probably lied, you may have lusted after people, you've probably bent a few of the moral rules that you claim to be set up by reason. You've probably never killed a person before, and will never start a genocide, but you'd want God to spare you if you pursue dishonesty and lustful desires, wouldn't you? Those are amoral.

So the "natural evils" are the evils of mankind? What the ****? So you think the 2004 tsunami was God punishing evil people? How about the infants born without lungs? What is their punishment? How about the countless civilizations undoubtedly destroyed in the universe by the random explosions distant stars? I suppose that is due to human evil too? Cholera, that's because somebody, somewhere, is pissing off God? People needlessly dying of horrible climate-caused famine, I suppose they just weren't properly doing the rain dance?

You make me sick.

My point is that we always have a choice, and we don't only have one shot at choosing right. You can throw all the paradoxes you want at me. All it does for me is to solidify my feeling that people are just looking for excuses to claim there is no God. I have a hard time believing atheism really exists. If I pushed you off a cliff, what will you scream all the way down? What would you be thinking? Would you still want to disbelieve in a power that saves half-way down the fall, or would you then start to hope?

You DO NOT have a choice. If God is all powerful, and all knowing, and created you, then you are his puppet. You are his automaton. He has planned out every action of yours. Ever decision that you think is yours, is his. You want to blame criminals for their own actions? Sorry, that's God's fault. You want to blame anyone for anything they did, or give credit to anyone for anything they did? Nope sorry, God did it.

This is exactly the problem of evil I was talking about before. The actions of mankind ARE the actions of God, and if God does not like evil, then he surely would not have made it possible for his creations to do evil, and if he could, he would.

But he hasn't.

These aren't "excuses" to not believe in God. Philosophers didn't sit down hundreds of years ago and say "gee, I really ****ing hate God, let's just make up excuses to not believe in him!"

No, they sat down and actually thought about what the holy men were telling them. Unlike you, philosophers didn't take what people were telling them for granted. They examined every assertion, every premise, and saw if it held. These "paradoxes" merely highlight the flawed logic of theologians, and show, in simple language, how flawed their logic actually is. Philosophy is the process of critically examining things. Its simply about thinking for yourself instead of complacently accepting dogma. Philosophy is not biased against religion, reason is biased against religion. It is not the fault of philosophers that religious arguments do not hold any water, it is the fault of religion itself. If religious arguments actually held, and if the evidence for God was compelling, then every thinking man would believe in God and philosophy and science would support such belief. Unfortunately, the arguments do not hold.

Also, your willingness to push people off cliffs to test their faith is remarkably telling of the religious spirit.

I don't know all the answers. I don't have answers to your paradoxes. Nobody in the world can pretend to know all the answers to questions that challenge human logic concerning God. All I know is, I have experienced Him, I have felt His presence, I have seen his miracles, and I'm a completely changed person than what I used to be. If that's not enough to believe, then I don't know what is.

So there you have it, your faith is based on irrational, anecdotal experience, contrary to reason. This is known as a delusion.

 

[Pesmerga]

Of course religion is irrational. Some people need to believe in a higher power so they can get through life on a day to day basis. Don't let one's beliefs speak for them, let their actions do the talking.

I believe in a higher power. Gravity.

 

[99.vikram]

He never created us to do the evil that humans do, but humans do them anyway because they'd rather ignore God. Needless to say, that goes back to the choice we have

...

God loves and cares about ALL of His creations. He'll never hate any of them, even if they do despicable actions. People who live for themselves and by themselves will see God's judgment for themselves when they die.

Why would God create us with the capacity for unspeakable evil (Hitler, etc.) if he loved all of us? Is he a sadist, or simply uncaring?

Did Hitler make bad choices? Weren't his choices shaped entirely by genetics, parenting and social programming? (I'd like an argument to this point if you have one)

I have a hard time believing atheism really exists. If I pushed you off a cliff, what will you scream all the way down? What would you be thinking? Would you still want to disbelieve in a power that saves half-way down the fall, or would you then start to hope?

Of course I'd hope for a merciful God if I fell off a cliff. But that's not rational thought, that's a dying man clinging to hope.

Just because I hope for something doesn't make it true.

EDIT:
On a lighter note, If I created a world as imperfect as this one I'd kill myself out of shame!

 

[mortiz-Redux]

being omnipotent and omniscient is mutually exclusive.

 

[jet_porkins]

to theotherguy: I could choose to respond to every thing you put out there, as there are some things I feel the need to correct, but since the discussion is now turning to throwing in insults, as well as making false assertions about what I believe, I'm just going to leave it at that. It'll go nowhere.

Good talk, though, while it lasted.

Also,

Did Hitler make bad choices? Weren't his choices shaped entirely by genetics, parenting and social programming? (I'd like an argument to this point if you have one)

I'm sorry, this is a fantastic question, but I'm afraid I don't have an adequate enough answer for you at the moment.

 

[delusional]

In regards to being inclusive of all people, not just Hebrews, the book of Galatians clears that up quite clearly:

3:28: There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free man, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

29: And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's descendants, heirs according to promise.

So while the initial words were spoken to Jews, we are adopted into that promise in Christ Jesus.

This is the Abrahamic Covenant that promised everyone on the earth would be blessed by Abraham. The New covenant is just an extension of the Mosaic Covenant, which was made with the Hebrews. (when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not the world) During the New covenant, every single person on earth would recognize the Hebrew God as the only true God. And as part of the Abrahamic Covenant, stipulated in Genesis 12:1-3, I will bless those who bless you, and him who curses you I will curse; and by you all the families of the earth shall bless themselves., thus since the world would be blessing Israel, the world would be blessed.

Also, regarding the house of Judah, Jesus is a descendant of the tribe of Judah. Jesus is called The Lion from the tribe of Judah, the root of David in Rev 5:5.

The genealogy of Jesus has a whole host of problems. First, If Jesus is a product of a virgin birth then he isn't a descendant of the tribe of Judah. Second, if you believe inheritance can be drawn from adoption (this has no support), then the genealogy in Matthew can't be used, because the genealogy goes through Jeconiah (none of his children can sit on the throne), thirdly, if you use the genealogy in Luke, Jesus still isn't applicable since the line is supposed to go through Solomon, which it does not.

Yes, we see v. 34 happening even now. While people claim to not "believe" in Him, that doesn't mean their ignorant of His will for human lives. Even the most common of atheists knows that the God they claim to disbelieve supposedly loves them. Atheists I've spoken with say they don't believe in God because of certain rules some scripture writes about for gender roles. That has nothing to do with the existence or nonexistence of God, only that they disagree with what the scripture says.

You don't seem to understand what "know" means in the context of the verse. You know how "Know" is used to imply sexual relations in the bible, well "know" here is used similarly, think of how people say they have a personal relationship with God, since that's what it basically means. So only a very small percentage of the World "knows" God.

Now lets make the assumption that "know" means what you say, the new covenant has two basic stipulations, the Law being written within our hearts and Universal acknowledgment of God. Only recently has the second requirement reached just about everyone. What does this say about the time between Jesus and now? A covenant is either in effect or it is not. So we were either under the old covenant during this time, or we were under some intermediary covenant. The latter is never mentioned so we can only assume we are under the former.

Either way, there is some drastic implications that needs reconciling.

I don't pretend to know all of the answers. For instance, children in 3rd world countries who die before they hear the name Jesus translated into their language. I don't know what happens to them. I don't know why God needs angels. I'm no well-knowledged person when it comes to these paradoxical or quote/unquote "counter-intuitive" topics. All I know that I need to know is that I'm adopted into the new covenant, and that He's real. That's not even mentioning the miracles I've experienced that solidify that belief.

I'm unsure as to the fate of children, but those who never heard of Jesus have a chance to be "saved".

Romans 2:13-15
[13] For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.
[14] When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law.
[15] They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them

 

[Glirk Dient]

To the first question, God does create everyone for a life of good, and not for evil, when we choose to follow and trust him. When we choose to do evil and decide to not follow and trust Him, we go against that promise. He never created us to do the evil that humans do, but humans do them anyway because they'd rather ignore God. Needless to say, that goes back to the choice we have.

So God creates everyone to do good...even the babies that he kills before they have a chance to do good in this world? What about the people that he created to be skeptical? He made me a skeptical person and he hasn't given us a single reason to believe in him. Why should I burn in hell forever for being intelligent? It is his fault he made me the way I am. He is all knowing so he knew what would happen when he made me. He is all powerful so he could have created people better. Why even need to test us? He knows whats going to happen already.

As to the second question, EVERY person is born with the above mentioned promises for a plan of goodness in life. But not everyone chooses to follow that plan.

Wrong...not everyone is born the same. What about people who are mentally retarded and simply cannot grasp the concept of an invisible guy in the sky? Or people who have been ravished by mental disease to the point they have lost touch with reality. Why has god not given them a chance? He made them that why so why should they burn in hell for his mistake?

God's command to follow and live the life He promises us for good is not arbitrary or unreasonable. Either live for the best life you could possibly live, or live life making your own decisions, your own path, blind to the future. God sees your whole life right before his very eyes, where you - along with the rest of the planet - has no idea what will happen a minute from now. Logically, if you had two decisions before you: walk through a mile of tremendous, thick fog, blind to what's an inch in front of you, or walk through that same fog with someone who sees that entire mile of obstacles, so you trust them to get you out of the fog, what would you pick? Walking in the fog yourself leads to stumbling, physical and spiritual. It hardens you. The latter option provides the opposite.

I have lived a great life. In fact I would argue that I have done more good in this world than most Christians have. Yet I will burn in hell forever for simply not believing in god. Why is this such a sin? I thought he wanted people to live a good life and help others. I have done that yet because I don't buy the product of religion I should be fearful of what will happen to me for the rest of eternity

It's in my understanding that a pre-existing God who created mankind, created morality as we know it. Man wasn't created, and then thought amongst themselves "well, I think this is rational morality, and this is irrational morality. Let's put this into law." The biblical God created the fundamental laws of morality (stealing, lying, killing, etc). These laws have transcended throughout modern civilizations and they have adapted them into their own laws. Would murder be illegal if God hadn't said it was evil? Who knows?

Things such as murder, stealing and lying being wrong have existed in many many societies before Christianity was invented. These concepts have been shown to be universal principles among societies and we can take a scientific approach and understand why. These concepts are important for a functioning society. Have you even read the 10 commandments? Our laws are not at all based upon religion(except in a few cases like not being able to buy alcohol on Sundays or allowing people to live a happy life because they are different). The only 10 commandments that are laws are the ones that you mentioned. Read the rest and they don't make it any further than the bible.

I disagree. He hates it, but he chooses to show mercy. Argue this point all you want, this is the only response I'll give you: God's mercy. He'll eradicate those who pursue evil in the last days of the earth with His wrath, when all of those that even have a heart to listen and obey him are persecuted off the face of the earth. Then he'll wipe them out. Is that the kind of judgment you were looking for?

You sound like the kid that gets beat up in school and says you better watch out or my big brother is gonna get you. It's a pretty pathetic attempt at fear mongering saying that this merciful god is going to come and kill everyone that he feels like because he made them to think for themselves. When does he plan on doing this? How many thousands of years are you people going to wait for a train that will never come?

God loves and cares about ALL of His creations. He'll never hate any of them, even if they do despicable actions. People who live for themselves and by themselves will see God's judgment for themselves when they die.

And how do we know this? No one has ever been able to come back from the dead and tell us that god exists. It's impossible for us to tell whether religion is true or simply made up. It's infallible. There is no way to show that god existing is more credible than it all being made up. In fact without any evidence at all the highest probability we can give to god existing is 1 in infinity. Mathematically there is nothing more impossible. The probability we can assign to god being a delusion and the whole thing being made up is 1 in a very large number as there have been many religions before that no one believes anymore and there are countless religions in the world and only 1 can be true. We can then assume that all of the other religions have been made up so we know people are willing to buy into these delusions. Given the probabilities I stated before it's more probable that your religion is also made up as there exists no evidence what so ever to show that there is any reason to believe that our world and life as we know it has come to exists the way science has proven it to be.

No, there is much evil in this world. That is the act of mankind, not God, as I've stated already. He didn't decide the world to be horrid for people, people decided they wanted it to be horrid for themselves. This argument once again blames God for our own transgressions. God has mercy enough on mankind to give us all a choice to follow His promises for us, or not. We will always have a choice to turn to Him throughout our entire life. You've probably done some amoral things as well. NOTE: I do NOT presume to know you or your life at all, but you've probably lied, you may have lusted after people, you've probably bent a few of the moral rules that you claim to be set up by reason. You've probably never killed a person before, and will never start a genocide, but you'd want God to spare you if you pursue dishonesty and lustful desires, wouldn't you? Those are amoral.

A lot of assumptions. First off there is no such thing as good or evil. Next don't try to act like you don't touch yourself at night and have never told a lie in your life. Theists and atheists are all people and prohibition/abstinence has proven not to work. Theists may act like they are "holier than thou" on the outside but they are in the end people and are in no way better than anyone else.

My point is that we always have a choice, and we don't only have one shot at choosing right. You can throw all the paradoxes you want at me. All it does for me is to solidify my feeling that people are just looking for excuses to claim there is no God. I have a hard time believing atheism really exists.

Atheism does exist. To be specific I am an agnostic atheist. I have no belief in god because I believe it's impossible to know whether or not he really exists.

If I pushed you off a cliff, what will you scream all the way down? What would you be thinking? Would you still want to disbelieve in a power that saves half-way down the fall, or would you then start to hope?

But that's an entirely different discussion.

I would yell F*****CK! I wish I had evolved with wings and feathers. Oh man this sucks.

I don't know all the answers. I don't have answers to your paradoxes. Nobody in the world can pretend to know all the answers to questions that challenge human logic concerning God. All I know is, I have experienced Him, I have felt His presence, I have seen his miracles, and I'm a completely changed person than what I used to be. If that's not enough to believe, then I don't know what is.

The discussion is now going in circles.

Also, God is not a creature.

True no one can know every answer which is why I find it silly that people create delusions to fill the gaps. If humans don't know the answer what is wrong with saying "We simply don't know yet." Why trick yourself into believing something that couldn't possibly be true and simply doesn't make sense? If god was so merciful why wait so long to reveal the bible to people? Did everyone before then go straight to hell because God chose not to reveal himself? How is that their fault? There was nothing they could do. Also don't you think it's a bit odd how a perfect, all knowing god would have so many human errors in the bible? Take a look at noahs ark. How could every species in the whole world live within walking distance of noahs house? There are species of animals that live in small secluded areas all over the whole world. There is no way he could have gathered every species. Next don't you find it odd how the bible claims the earth is 6000 years old yet we have proven it to be much much older? What about things like genetic disease, the solar system, evolution, the big bang, seperate sects of the same religion? These are all things that simply do not add up with the bible. With as many inconsistencies as it has the probability that all religions are made up is getting higher and higher. It's simply irrational to believe these days when science has pushed our understanding of everything around us so far. Even if you don't accept science understand that neither does atheism. Atheism doesn't make any claims. It simply deals with a lack of belief in religion. You guys say this is the story and we say prove it. You guys can't so we don't buy it. We look towards science for answers because science is the only thing our there making rational, logical sense about the world around us.

Religion simply exists because people want it to. They wrap their heads this idea and they find any way they can to fit it into their understanding of reality. Religion is a delusion supported by group think, forced indoctrination during childhood and lack of scientific understanding. I am sorry for being so mean but I am sick of religious people acting like they are always so right and better than everyone else. Beside why should religion be free from harsh criticism? People do it all the time in politics when talking about the economy, iraq, bush, so why should the cosmos and origin of life be regarded as sacred and rude to talk about? Also don't you think it's an incredibly negative way to live a life...waiting for another better one? Wouldn't you rather want to understand that this is the one and only life you get so you can live your life to the fullest and enjoy your limited number of days here on earth?

 

[Pesmerga]

shitshitshit stop with the quote wars

 

[BetaMaster]

This entire discussion is moot. God is dead and we killed him.