Did you know that...

Post Reply New Topic

I agree.

There is no need for a plan of salvation if there is no need for salvation. I just think that "demand" is perhaps the wrong word since God could just as easily planned otherwise.

And under the terms of the presentation of God as in total control (for what kind of all powerful God would not be?) Christ was created and raised in the same spirit as a Thanksgiving turkey to be slaughtered at the correct moment and consumed (at least symbolically) forever afterwards.

Not necessarily, though. I mean, that's a very blunt and irreverent way of looking at it, but not necessary. We don't believe Christ was a created being. That's a Jehovah's Witness idea. Rather, Jesus was with God in the beginning, and through Him all things were created, including us. So you can't say Jesus was bred for that purpose if His existence predated that of creation.

Now, inasmuch as Jesus was BORN from a human being (Mary), you might say that because even prophecies predicted the events of Jesus' life. I don't know about the "same spirit as a Thanksgiving turkey..." The spirit of the Thanksgiving turkey is that of celebration. Jesus' death, while it may be celebrated NOW as it was post-resurrection, was a time of distress and mourning. I say celebrated "now" only because it is in the resurrection that salvation is created and thus there is even cause for celebration. You'll note in the gospels Christ's followers gained an entirely different understanding of His teachings after this event. Various "messiahs" or revolutionaries/reformers had come before Christ. It's just terribly difficult to accomplish what Jesus accomplished if you aren't actually the Son of God. Indeed, these guys couldn't come back after being put to death.

But nice try with the Thanksgiving turkey analogy. Other than the mistake of saying "Christ was created," you have an almost Groucho Marxian picture of it.

Thanks. Groucho Marx s one of my all time heroes.
I am merely reading it as I have heard Christians say it. To say Christ existed before he was born is something I have never heard before and I see no way to take that except a your personal interpretation. You cannot have a resurrection without a death and one is therefore rather irrational to celebrate one without the other. You cannot say Christ's destiny could have been otherwise than crucifixion for then humanity would remain forever unforgiven and Christianity would never have come into being. That is the basic logic of the religion as it is universally expressed. I am not being irreverent, merely openly stating what is proclaimed.

Actually, one of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity is that Jesus is God Himself. Therefore, He is the Creator.

So it's not just AngelRho's personal interpretation.

@ Sand

Christians believe that Christ has always existed, that he is co-eternal with the father and the Spirit. They base this on the numerous occasions through the NT that this is mentioned. John 1:3 even credits the act of creation itself to Christ. As does Colossians 1:16.

Then the crucifixion of Christ who, apparently was basically unkillable, is a sham. There was no sacrifice and all that crucifixion stuff is just a bit of celestial propaganda to cause Jews to be persecuted for centuries.

Man, do you type too much. But anyway ...

You still choose to miss the real point here. Why does a loving God allow imperfect beings to cause harm to the world in the first place? Doesn't God see the future? Doesn't God see beforehand our sufferings and deep pain as a result of man's imperfections and sin? Then why does He not prevent such a future from happening?

Why do people have to suffer because of other people's sins and imperfections? Why does a child have to suffer because his parents don't live for God?

Think about these questions for yourself, not just to reply to me and neglect the main issue.

If God is so loving, why allow a world of hatred and pain?



All you're doing is watering down Yahweh's cruel character. A loyal Jew in the days of Moses wouldn't see the need to justify Yahweh's acts the way you do. He'd simply understand that that's how Yahweh's character is and that what He commands is considered divine and right no matter how cruel He is.

And that's most likely why so many Jews chose not to worship such an unpleasant god. I can easily understand why they would run to other gods that suited their needs and pleasures more than Yahweh did.



The difference is that we are limited beings who aren't able to prevent all further harm from happening to anyone. Only God has the power to stop every harm and evil out there.



If Yahweh were a human being but with the same personality and character, wouldn't you be wary of such a character? Be honest.



Better than putting people to death simply for opposing Yahweh's standards and expectations.



So the safety of the child depends on how well his parents treat him. If they suck as parents, it's the child who pays ...



So it means that you need to rely on your own standards and principles for your understanding of why Yahweh did this and that instead of simply accepting that Yahweh did this and that because He is free to do whatever He wants without anyone being able to stop Him.



Thank Yahweh He's not a real character! Such behavior of executing children for the sins of their parents or executing someone for merely picking sticks on the Sabbath would be unacceptable coming from a human being.

I would want him to be put in jail for being such a danger to others!



But having them severely punished for their inevitable failures is.



It is quite simple. According to the Old Testament, if any Jew under the Old Covenant damned his parents to a life of hell or something (yes, I understand that cursing in the Bible has nothing to do with the English word "f**k"), then he was to be surely put to death. No "test his motives" or anything of that sort. Just kill him.



You should see my little cousin then. He's below 10 years of age but can come up with the most disrespectful words and phrases to say to his own parents. Don't think that only a teenager/adult would do such a thing to their parents.

But this doesn't mean we go kill him for being so disrespectful to his parents. Instead, we take him to a specialized counselor for misbehaving children.



Yeah, executing Achan's children in such a cruel manner merely for the sin of their father is NOT child abuse at all, right?

Come on, AngelRho. You're an intelligent person (and you seem like a good guy with high morals and principles). It's time you start being reasonable about Yahweh's actions for once.



So was Moses schizophrenic?

Was Joshua schizophrenic? He did, after all, have children killed for the sin of their father because God demanded that they be killed.

Oh, the irony. If only you choose to get it.

So we have a god who sacrifices himself to appease his own anger over the imperfectness of the humans he created.

Well, at least he's not blaming his own creations for their imperfectness.

...Oh, wait.

Yeah, poor guy. Didn't look like he was aware of what he got himself into until it was too late, lol.

God is not the cause of imperfect beings. Perfect beings in the image of God have a choice--to continue in the way God made them, or to try to improve on that by doing something God specifically said not to, thereby introducing the flaw of sinful nature. God made man such that he is free, to freely love God and submit to Him. But along with the ability to choose good is also the ability to choose evil. If God wasn't loving, there'd be no choice. Suffering is a result of man's choices to do wrong. Now, God sees not just the future but all possible outcomes. I think perhaps it is one goal of God to end human suffering, but perhaps the end of all human suffering is in a proper time and place. It's unnecessary to say God isn't loving because He allows the current state to be since what God has in mind is likely the optimal way for the current state of affairs to play out. It would be less loving to end all the possible future choices and consequences by bringing the world to an end now, assuming that it is God's will to continue. When God DOES bring that world to an end, the time for making decisions will have run out. In order to bring about the future God desires, the time to decide to do good must continue; but at the same time, so must the time to do evil.


I would think the answer here is self-evident. We are all as human beings inextricably linked. What happens to one person affects another. Children have to suffer for their parents because of the connection between parent and child. Actions have consequences. A parent, for example, who routinely drives intoxicated and doesn't make sure that children are properly restrained in an automobile risks the lives of his children. It might not be fair, but honestly, what beyond supernatural intervention can you expect? Miracles are balanced between what is necessary to bring about a desired result and the preservation of natural order. Ignoring that is testing God, which human beings are instructed not to do. My brother was killed by a drunk driver when all he was trying to do was cross a road to catch butterflies for a class assignment. 10 years old. DWI and vehicular homicide laws weren't what they are now, and being a Native American put him outside the usual jurisdiction. Is it fair? No. But all that happened was a result of bad decisions: My brother for being at the wrong place at the wrong time and not watching for oncoming traffic; the driver for being intoxicated and not responding in a timely manner; my parents for not doing a better job to see that he wasn't taking lethal risks; his friend for not watching out for him; the state legislature and reservation government for not sticking it to the driver... Where was God? Probably deciding that instantaneous death was preferable to languishing to die in an ICU or committing him to lifelong paralysis. Probably understanding that my brother's spiritual life was secure with nothing to dread in death. Probably looking to my own life which was radically changed by being an only child.

Children suffer for their parents for two reasons: They are victims of circumstance; parents fail to see or care what the consequences or to the child. Parents also exhibit an influence over their children, which only guarantees that their children will act just as they do. And because the children become adults who perpetuate their own parents' bad behavior, it guarantees they will suffer the same consequences their own parents suffered and will pass the same behaviors on to their own children who will be faced with the same choices and consequences.



I've often thought about that. Nothing is being neglected. I suspect you just dislike my answers.


BECAUSE God is so loving. He gives us the choice. There's no more to say here.


Your opinion. I don't HAVE to justify anything. I'm just answering a few questions.


Your opinion.


True, but we also have the ability IF we are universally united in the cause of God to bring further harm to an end. I'd be interested in the actual odds of that happening, though. God can always work THROUGH us to accomplish an end to evil. But are we willing?


Not if He were a human being. It's not a human's place to be God.


Your opinion.


Out of the Biblical argument, that's almost just common sense. Why would anyone WANT to be bad parents? Why would anyone WANT their children to pay for their (the parents') own mistakes? That ought to motivate parents to be better parents.


My standards and principles were initially cultural, and it is true that I have to obey the laws of my home state and country up to a certain point--that being if the laws are unjust, and I don't mind death or incarceration to make a point. Otherwise, my standards and principles are derived from the Bible. I don't see any incompatibility other than Torah directives that establish the Israelites as a unique society dedicated to the worship of God. I don't have a problem accepting that God can do what He wants without anyone being able to stop Him. I don't see what my own standards have to do with it.


Maybe that's why it didn't come from a human being. Just a thought...


Which demonstrates your own lack of mercy.

Just kidding.

Seriously, incarceration takes someone away from remaining publicly useful. Depending on the severity of the crime, slavery is preferable as a temporary measure to repay a debt and as a deterrent. The death penalty is reserved only for the crimes which cannot be remediated and for which there is no reciprocal punishment, such as murder.


Actually, I'm going to agree with you. You might notice that even the ancient Israelites had recourse for sinful actions by essentially coming before the high priest with the required sacrifice and confessing what the sacrifice was for. Obedience and asking God for mercy when wrong has been done followed by genuine repentance resulted in God's favor in spite of wrongdoing. That doesn't necessarily preclude you from consequences. Look at King David. God spared his life more times than he deserved, but God didn't withhold consequences such as David's scandalous act involving Bathsheba resulting in the death of his firstborn son with her.

"Severely punished for their inevitable failures" would be narcissistic, with the understanding that the failures were inevitable. It is, however, mercy and forgiveness that mitigates the severity of punishment. And I've already said that just because the Bible allows for certain punishments in certain instances, it doesn't mean that they were directly COMMANDED to do this each and every time. Parents were to teach their children in such a way as to avoid evil actions and the consequences that came with it.


But that's a pretty serious offense! Absolutely unacceptable! That behavior has deep roots and cannot be lightly tolerated. Any child who fully understood what that meant would not do that to his parents. You just don't do it. It's worse than murder.


This just means that you have the luxury of trying to understand the behavior and respond appropriately. This isn't something that the Israelites of the Exodus had. My little boy threatens to give me spankings and he puts me in "time-out" all the time, despite the fact spankings are a rarity in our house and we never even use the term "time out" around him. There are ways of approaching behavior that does not involve such severity. The Bible does not prohibit "any means necessary" and thus does not require violence for every minor offense.


Nope. Not at all. Consider what Achan actually did wrong: He took plunder intended for use in the Tabernacle, i.e. things that God claimed for Himself. The instructions were very clear regarding what the Israelites were to do, and Achan's sin cost the Israelites an important battle. It was a severe crime, any way you look at it, and the items he took weren't exactly something one could hide easily. What, he just assumed that no one saw him take the items? That no one saw or helped him dig a pit under his tent to store those items? Exactly which part of "But keep yourselves from the things set apart, or you will be set apart for destruction" did Achan not understand? They were warned of what would happen to them and Achan only had himself to blame.

Now, the reference to children in the Bible has the same meaning as "progeny" except when specifically referring to small children. Something you need to understand about ancient Israelite culture was that they did not have a concept as we Christians do of life going on beyond death. For them, you went on living as long as your name survived, i.e. your lineage through your male children. In this view, for as long as Achan had sons or daughters living, his name survived in the lineage. Achan's punishment was much more severe than a simple death penalty by stoning. It was Achan's COMPLETE destruction, that his name no longer had a place among the families of Israel. And even if you find that unfair, why assume that Achan's (presumably adult) children weren't complicit with Achan's theft? Their own father is setting Israel up for destruction, they were already defeated at Ai, so did they really think they'd be spared if they just kept their mouths shut? And if so, you potentially have an entire CLAN knowingly and deliberately acting in rebellion and setting up the entire nation for destruction. Remember, God previously spared Rahab and her family at Jericho. Why wouldn't have God spared just one person for being righteous? But no... God had to call out each tribe, each clan, and each family to reveal whodunnit. They deserved what happened to them.


I accept that God did what was right at a time when His presence was felt more deeply than probably any other time throughout the Bible and throughout history since Adam and Eve communed with Him in Eden. I accept that God's actions during times of great struggle are reasonable and designed to accomplish His will for His people. I also accept that God has shown Himself merciful during these and later times. I also accept that human beings (myself included) are limited and find God's logic difficult in comparison with our own, yet I also accept that God does what He does for His own reasons and it is not my place to question His wisdom. Yes, I ask God "Why?" all the time. Very often I feel I get an answer, and sometimes I don't, at least not anything that is very clear. But my understanding is not prerequisite for obedience. I don't need any advanced logic or reason beyond what I already know, and that is that God is consistent and trustworthy. Having reasoned that far, faith is not a tremendous step for me.

I don't know if my morals and principles are really that high--I'm far from perfect or even good. I just try as best I can, which really is all I can say about it. As to being reasonable, have you considered the rationality of trying to hold a superior divine being to YOUR standards? We have to accept things as they are because we lack the wisdom to determine whether the status quo really is the only way it COULD be or if we could somehow determine a superior way. You don't KNOW that things could be better from your own perspective. I have no issue with being "reasonable" with my beliefs, but I do wonder whether the same applies to your own views.



Are those questions, or assumptions?

There's more evidence, or at least precedence, for priests and judges getting a definitive encounter with God in Torah and Judges. Not only did these men have faith that they received a divine word, their encounters were not easily dismissed even if they lacked faith. Where I think you might be a touch unreasonable in "judging" them here is ignoring the situation and how God's "demands" (as you put it) applies. The Israelites had no reason to doubt Moses or Joshua having experienced these encounters themselves. Either it really was God who commanded them or it was mass hysteria. Mass hysteria is rarely long-term and seldom constructive, much less possessing the potential to build a nation.

===

Am I a Jew or ancient Israelite? No, and I only occasionally consult online Talmudic resources if I actually have a need to dig further into how culturally certain issues were understood, but with the understanding that Rabbinical Judaism was not the ancient religion practiced in Moses' day. It's no secret what my denomination is nor the implications of how that has affected me spiritually (in mostly positive ways). But I also believe that Christians have to make up their own minds about the churches they attend in relation to doctrine and whether that is acceptable to them or not. If you ask me "Is the OT still useful and relevant?" then of course, the answer is yes. But that has to be understood in terms of how these laws were actually carried out and in what spirit they were given. Christians stand to gain an understanding of their heritage as well and should take time to ponder WHY we don't practice these same things the ancient Israelites practiced. What's OK for the Jew is not necessarily OK for the Gentile, and there are reasons for that. We get to know where we came from, but our true identity as brothers and sisters in Christ lies within His teachings. As a new covenant with God, much of what Jesus taught supersedes OT observances.

The thing about the OT for a Christian is that if THAT is the basis for your worship, you don't get to pick and choose what you will/will not do. If you live under the law, you must follow ALL of it, from the sacrifices to killing kids for cursing their parents. The NT is clear that this does not apply to us as Christians, but rather advocates the law of love and forgiveness in its place. Without the Law, we do not know we are sinners and are therefore blessed that the Law has been given. Under the law, we are all guilty and deserve death. With Jesus, we are forgiven.

But I still don't understand how a loving God could allow anyone to make choices that lead to suffering. You simply explained (once again) how God allows humans to make free choices, but it doesn't explain how it makes him a loving God who doesn't want any sentient being to suffer in pain and agony. Either God is loving or He is not. Allowing humans to make free choices is not necessarily a sign of love. It's irrelevant. A human being with no free will can easily be shown love by God just as much as (if not more than) one who does have free will.

Actually, the concept of free will is just an excuse to explain why the world is full of harm and suffering despite the assumed existence of a supposedly loving God. Logically speaking, the concept of free will is logically unnecessary to believe in. Human behavior can sufficiently be explained by determinism even better than the free will theory. That's why psychopaths can never choose to stop being psychopaths (for example). How does the free will theory explain that one?



I'm sorry for what happened with your brother. It isn't an easy experience to have your own brother (10 years of age) die in such a tragic way. Hope whatever trauma you may have had as a result of this be diminished and relieved.

If I were that driver, I would have taken full responsibility for what happened regardless of whether God exists or not. If the driver didn't take responsibility, then shame on him.

That aside, a loving God wouldn't have allowed you to have to go through this. There is simply no reason for an omnipotent God to allow such things to happen if He really does care about us.

I apologize if I failed to show more care and understanding for your situation. I just cannot accept that a loving God would allow it to happen.



But you agree it's not fair, right?



Well, I suspect some PTSD in your answers. I could just be speculating, though.



You say it in such a cold and calm manner as if we're all supposed to accept it as true.



It's true that it's just my opinion but I just can't find a logical connection between the existence of a God that cares and the existence of this reality.



But why should God rely on us to be willing to stop all harm and evil? Where is He?



This means that you find Yahweh's moral character to be something to be wary of if it were manifested in a mere human being, right? But isn't God's moral character something to be praised and admired and imitated?



Well, it's not so simple as you make it seem to be. There are unloving and uncaring parents out there, as you very well know. So, once again, why does a loving God allow this to happen?



You rely on your own moral standards to try to water down Yahweh's cruel actions in the Bible. My point is that, as long as you can make your moral standards always seem to agree with Yahweh's cruel actions in the Bible, then there's nothing much that anyone can do to make you realize how cruel Yahweh's actions seem to be to so many people living in this day and age.



Its comments like the above that make me see you just don't care (at the moment) how cruel Yahweh is. As long as the Christian faith is giving you what you want (emotionally, psychologically, and socially), then you have no desire to truly question the God of your faith.



Is cursing one's parents a crime that cannot be remediated and which lacks reciprocal punishment? How is it at the same level as murder?



It really depends on what kind of mood Yahweh was in. Sometimes, He felt like showing some mercy to certain people. Other times, He didn't feel like it at all. That's why He killed two sons of Aaron without mercy. And let's not forget Achan and his family. Where was God's mercy and forgiveness then?



That's not what I see in the Old Testament.



No, it's not. Murder ends your fellow human being's life. Cursing your parents doesn't. And sometimes cursing one's parents can be justified if (for example) they are horrible narcissistic parents with psychopathic personalities and the son/daughter has had enough. Better to hurl words at them than have them murdered.



But I thought cursing one's parents was not a minor offense. Or do you have your own watered down definition for the word "curse"?

Plus, where was Yahweh to provide the Jews with the right understanding of why a child behaves the way he behaves? Funny how He had to wait for today's educated human beings to come and give us such understanding.



And the children? What about them?



First of all, you don't know for sure the ages of the children executed. Secondly, the Bible has many instances in which God demanded that infants be dead, so why should it be any surprise that Achan's children could have easily been young children who had no idea why the hell they were being executed in such a harsh manner?

The fact is (as I keep saying over and over again) that Yahweh is a narcissistic image of God, the kind that gives mercy to whoever it feels like giving it to. Yes, narcissists can (and do) show mercy, but they are so unstable that it's very hard to tell what kind of people a narcissist would choose to give mercy to and why. They simply have unstable moral characters.

Heck, Hitler and the likes showed mercy to certain people!



But you've chosen to take quite a blind step for yourself. God can do whatever He wants no matter how cruel you believe it may be.

That's not reasonable at all. I might as well say that Hitler allowed the Holocaust to happen out of love for his own people.

For your own good and sanity, you are better off questioning and challenging any unacceptable behavior (even if it's from God Himself).



As I told you before, I don't need to be omniscient in order to know that a loving God would not allow a world of pain and hatred to occur. Note the word "loving". It should not just be a label thrown blindly at whatever deity you worship.



But weren't you arguing that God would never command anyone to kill children? That was my point.

Anyway, the events of Moses and Joshua in the Bible are full of fictional accounts made up to give the Jews reading/listening to the Scriptures reasons to believe that Yahweh is God. That's religion for you.



The Gospel could never justify Yahweh's cruelty towards His own creation. No need to remind me of the Gospel.

He made us free. He loves us. It is a greater disservice to deprive us of our freedom to choose.


Determinism is an excuse for humans to absolve themselves of responsibility for their actions.


Don't worry about it. That wasn't the point of the story... Just merely that I know what tragedy is and have experience probably more than my share of pain and suffering. The difference, though, is that I see God in the suffering and I believe God shares in it.

What's more of a tragedy is that nothing happened to the driver. But it was a different time and place back then, which is what you have to understand.

Personally, I was too young to remember my brother at all, which to me is worse than knowing him at all and suffering the loss. As I grew up, my dad and his parents would call me by the wrong name, which went on for somewhere between 5-8 years and the incessant comparisons--how great my brother was, how smart my brother was, and how I'm sh!+. Later on it was "your brother would have beat your @$$." If I'd had the forethought and wit to come back with something, I'd have said, "yeah, my brother was so smart and so tough. If he was so smart, how'd he get himself killed crossing the road? What, he couldn't look and see the car coming and wait just a minute? Yeah, real smart, real tough guy." But it's probably best I never said anything.

But...

I was able to go to an excellent private school, had more than enough opportunities to do what I wanted, which lead to majoring in my interests in college, which is how I met my wife, and all things considered I have a wonderful life. That never would have happened if my brother had lived.


Sure. But I place blame where it is properly due.


Ad hominem. And if you want to go that route, I suspect Narcissistic Personality Disorder in yours.


I say it because it IS true. Whether you accept it or not is your decision to make, not mine.


OK.


He gave us this world to do as we will--to follow Him or not. He has tried in many ways over time to guide us, and it has worked where it was most critical. But at a certain age, a parent just has to let a child go, make the right decisions or don't, remain loyal or don't. He gives us the power to stop harm and evil. We choose not to. I don't blame God for that at all. BUT it seems people asking that question are all too willing to put human faults on God. Where is God? Within us if we want Him. But if we don't want Him, why expect anything more?


Missing the point. God is not a sinful human. However, God did come in physical form in the person of Jesus. People believed. And some were wary. That, I'm afraid, is a matter of faith, either believe the evidence says what it says or dismiss it to go on believing whatever you believed before. Praised, admired--yes. Imitated? Sure, but if you read the Bible carefully it is not always our place to stand in the place of God. Abraham and Lot didn't destroy Sodom and Gommorah. God executed His vengeance directly. Noah didn't cause the flood. God did. God initially drove the Canaanites out of Canaan but allowed a few to stay in order to keep wild animals out and assured the Israelites that they were to be disposed of in due time. Here we see one of the first times that God acts through His people to do His will. Moses didn't afflict the Egyptians with plagues, God did. And if God instructed the Israelites to take the land He promised them and punish evil people remaining in the land, then it shows that it is God's divine will to act. If there is a question of whether this is right or not, at the very least you can say, "well, God did tell all of us to do this, has blessed us in the journey so far, and the best evidence shows that this will continue as long as we obey God. If this isn't the way it should be, then it's ok because God is responsible." Like it or not, agree with it or not, God is to be obeyed. But also consider God's example when He allowed David to plan the building of the temple but denied him the right to carry out those plans? Basically, God told David that his reign was one of bloodshed and that it would be right for him to build the temple. That right passed to Solomon who built the temple during a time of peace. The most important physical object or place as the center for religious observance was built during a time of relative peace, which suggests to me that God values vengeance and war when it is NECESSARY, but far more values peace and well-being. Another example: The Ark of the Covenant. Inside the ark was placed the Law (specifically the 10 Commandments). Above the Law was placed the Mercy Seat. Get the imagery here: Mercy above Law. That speaks volume, in my opinion, anyway, of exactly what it is Yahweh values and desires for us to imitate.



Because God is loving, He gives us the choice.


The "cruelty" that you're accusing God of is merely your opinion. Where you see "cruel," I see "appropriate." My personal moral standards are inferior and I recognize that. I just do my best to follow Christ's teachings. Beyond that, there's little I can do for myself.

"...nothing much that anyone can do..."

Look, I respect other people's opinions and their right to view God in any light they wish. It seems to me that you strongly dislike my view and you think I ought to be persuaded against God. But I just don't see scripturally or logically why this should be. I admire your persistence in trying to proselytize me, but I've had plenty of time in my life already to be proselytized by a number of people ascribing to a number of ideologies: Homosexual male friends (some of whom didn't realize I was straight and insist I'm in the closet or in denial), Wiccans, Witnesses, secular humanism, relativism, not to mention other Christian denominations like the Presbyterians and the Methodists. I've questioned my faith on numerous occasions, mostly abandoned religious activity until the last years of college, and despite all I've been through I still find it holds true. What's so wrong with that?


The key word in the above quote is "truly." Exactly what does that mean? You mean question in such a way that I'd HAVE to reject God? That's bias. Sorry, but no. I'm not going to take an inherently biased look at something I've already found for myself to be true.


It's not the same level. It's worse.


Aaron's sons were not interested in God's mercy nor did they deserve it. Achan wasn't interested in mercy, and he didn't even confess anything until he knew it was too late. Also, Achan disobeyed a direct order, and since the Israelites lost the battle at Ai, it's reasonable to assume that more lives were lost than just Achan and his family. By sabotaging God's favor with the Israelites, Achan was effectively working for the other side. In modern warfare, that's called treason. You know what happens to soldiers guilty of treason?


OK, but that just tells me you only see what you want to see. You can say the same thing about me, of course, but that just means there's no real difference, we're not really having a serious discussion, and that I'm starting to wonder what the point even is anymore in continuing. I'll try, but you're showing the same unwillingness to think that you're attempting to show in me.



Here we go with narcissism again. Are you a narcissist? I'm not meaning to make this ad hominem, but you do make yourself appear as somewhat an expert on it. I've never met anyone I thought was a narcissist who actually was willing to admit to it, but you do show a lot of subtle signs.

So you think it's ok to curse your parents??? There's something WRONG with you. Get some help.

It's worse than murder because life is only a temporary state, anyway. Humans are the image-bearers of God, and therefore reverence of God is shown through the loving treatment of others. Murder is, in effect, an attack on God Himself and can only be repaid by requiring the life of the murderer. "Honor your father and mother" is the same thing. Your parents stand in the place of God in your life. You honor your parents not just when you obey them as a child, but also when you rely on them for their experience and wisdom and, sometimes in SPITE of your parents, turn out to be independently successful. These things reflect well on parents, whether they're good parents or not sometimes, and thus does them honor. Cursing your parents, especially if someone else around witnesses it, is an embarrassment. Further, it reveals the murderous intent of the heart. Even worse, cursing parents is effectively cursing God and is one step away from blasphemy. I think you still fail to see that this is not something you'd punish a young child for because a young child is incapable of committing this sin. Cursing your parents is DEEP. It's premeditated. It shows an intent and will to harm someone. And if there is an indication that person might be a danger to his or her parents, how might that reflect on the society at large or even how that person relates to God. It's a bad moon rising. It's an extremely negative influence. Don't tolerate it.


You're forgetting what a curse is. A little boy confusing parental actions with his own sense of justice is not a curse. He's expressing the sentiment that he feels mistreated and believes that punishment applies to everyone. Who punishes parents when they do wrong? If parents get away with it, why not a child? In a very naïve, 3-year-old sort of way, he's right. Curses imply eternal consequences. If my boy put me in "time out" and forgot about me to go play, he'd eventually remember that I'm still in time out, start to miss me, and come back for me so I'd play with him (I've tried this a couple of times, actually). The intended consequences of curses are not meant to be temporary. They are permanent.

Also, you can't just say "hey, I heard this kid cursing his parents. Let's go kill him because the Law says to." Hebrew justice didn't work that way. It would have to be multiple witnesses agreeing on the same thing. So you have a son, let's say he's 20 years old. He disagrees with his father over a business transaction at the local threshing floor and says "As God lives, may you this day and for all time be covered from head to toe in boils and never returned to your people..." It being a public display, it's embarrassing. It shows blatant disregard for parental authority (and God's authority). It shows disregard for human life. In the presence of witnesses, it's even more bold than it would be privately, which just amplifies the intent of the heart. All it takes then is for two or three landowners present to quietly slip out and talk to a Levite for that guy to be brought before a counsel and put to death.


Why shouldn't God allow us to come to an understand of things on our own? Besides, who says He DIDN'T provide the faithful with the right understanding?

Look at it another way: If the only language you know is English, how can you expect to teach a 3-year-old fluent Latin in one day? God is patient and willing to teach those who love Him over time.

Further, part of that is the separation between people and God due to fallen human nature. If we were all still in the Garden, God might let us in on all the big secrets. If good was ALL we were capable of, then good would be the only thing we'd be able to pass down to our children. Likewise, if "good" includes a proper understanding of relating to children, there wouldn't be a problem. But the reality is we are NOT completely and perfectly good nor have we that kind of knowledge. We can trust that God will lead us to teach our children correctly and help us gain an understanding of them.


If the children were allowed to live, then Achan's destruction would not have been complete--his name would have lived on. Though you can't say the same for EVERY situation, in THIS situation killing his complicit adult children along with their progeny was both justice and mercy. Who would WANT the children (little ones) knowing what their father was responsible for? What would that have meant for the children knowing what happened? Death for Achan's family, just as it was for the Canaanites, was justified.


Assuming they were adults, they were punished for being complicit in Achan's actions. Assuming they were small children, it was the merciful thing to do.

You want to talk about harsh: Their bodies were burned. In being stoned to death, their lives were brought to a relatively quick end. Fire takes longer--enough to feel the intense pain before dying. They COULD have just been burned alive.


Repeat it all you like, but repeating something doesn't make it true.


I'd say the universe is holding up quite well. Clearly, then, God is not a narcissist.


Irrelevant


I don't see it as cruel. And merely disagreeing with you doesn't make me blind. Perhaps I see something you don't. So who is the blind person?


Irrelevant. Hitler isn't God.


"For your own good and sanity..." According to whom?


I don't need to be omniscient in order to see how a loving God CAN allow a world of pain, etc. He loves us. Therefore, He gives us the choice. If we live in a world of pain and hatred, it is a world of pain and hatred of our own choosing. Perhaps if you WERE omniscient, you'd understand that.


When God DID command anyone to kill children, what were the reasons? What was the context? Are those reasons necessary in this day in age? Do we still live in the same context in which God gave those commands? That's MY point. You can't make the same claims today that were reality THEN.


Your opinion.


It doesn't. The message of the Gospel is that, while a fallen creation is worthy of death and "cruelty" (to use your word), God is merciful to forgive those who believe in Him. Jesus represents an atoning sacrifice so that we need not be reminded of our past guilt any further. God forgives and forgets--so should we. I'm thankful that I don't live "under the Law" and that God's mercy seat is above any human law.

As I reread what I wrote and then this last paragraph, it seems to me that the above discussion is really pointless. The thing is, I don't have a problem suggesting how the ancient law is justified, the killing of children, etc. Anyone who can use their brain just a little can come up with that and any number of reasons that may or may not be exactly right. The thing is, I recognize that I'm worthless "under the Law" and undeserving of any spiritual reward. Jesus, for me, is the capstone that makes any past wrongdoing, whether we blame God or ourselves, irrelevant in terms of the eternal spiritual consequences. For me, faith isn't "blind" because I've found holding true to the most important teaching, faith in the crucifixion and resurrection, to be enough. Because I love God, I want to do what Jesus instructed me to do and study the New Testament. You can't really get WHY this is necessary or the point of even having a Messiah if you don't study the OT.

How is it a greater disservice to deprive us of our freedom to choose? I need a logical explanation from you. I can't just believe it's more loving when I fail to see how God giving us the possibility to suffer in pain and agony is more loving than just creating us for Him to love us. The only reason you'd say it's more loving is because you'd otherwise be a secular instead of a Christian apologist.



Is that why I've been determined to have high moral standards?

Determinism is a conclusion derived from an extremely logical analysis of the nature of this reality. It's not meant to be taken as an excuse to absolve humans of moral responsibility.

By the way, you forgot to address the point about psychopaths. How does the free will theory explain the fact that psychopaths can't stop being psychopaths?



You can thank your "omnipotent" and "loving" God for that. The best He could do was "feel" your pain ...



But then again, you're not omniscient. You're just guessing that it never would have happened.



So you'd rather blame an imperfect being instead of a perfect being capable of stopping all harm and evil.

Note that I'm not saying that human beings are never to blame for their actions. But if God is real, He is more at fault for our problems than we are.



It was simply an observation ... not meant as an insult. But you have a point. I shouldn't have said that.

As for me having Narcissistic Personality Disorder, that's definitely not true. I don't fit the DSM criteria much. For one, I'm capable of having real empathy and compassion for others. And I don't believe that I'm the only human with real feelings and real rights. I am not the man of this world. I am simply a man in this world.



Truth doesn't depend on your moral justifications of Yahweh's (im)moral acts. You have your personal reasons to continue worshipping Yahweh regardless of what He does. That doesn't mean, however, that Yahweh is real or that Yahweh is a loving God.



Is that it? You don't care to demonstrate a logical connection between the existence of a God that cares and the existence of this reality?



We want God to stop all pain and suffering? So where is that loving God of yours? Let Him stop insulting our intelligence and bear some responsibility for the problems that have been occurring in this universe.

Oh, He has TRIED? That's it?

You know, people with NPD, at times, try to love. They just can't love the way that we would want them to. That's why an NPD father would have no problem saying to the public that he loves his son despite the fact that he's abused him so many times. A normal loving father would have gone crying his eyes out to his son asking him for forgiveness for all the abuse that the son has suffered before saying to others, with confidence and a clear conscience, that he loves his son dearly. And that's assuming that a normal loving father would abuse his son in the first place!

You want the truth? Your God is a twisted one. Sorry.



Typical speech of someone brainwashed by fundamental Christianity.

My father values peace over war, too. So what? He's still a pathological liar and an abuser. If he values peace, why doesn't he help make sure that peace prevails in his own family?

Similar question to your "peace-loving" God.



Does God love animals?



I totally understand that my own moral standards are not absolute. But it's really just a matter of common sense here. As a psychologically sane human being, how would one show love to the world if one were God? By allowing its inhabitants to suffer and feel pain if they don't do things the way God demands?

I'd rather be a being with no free will than be one with a free will that leads to pain and suffering.

I wonder where God's love is when He allows a psychologically disturbed person to cut a poor kid into several pieces while the kid is crying desperately for help and screaming in such an unimaginable pain before he is finally dead. Where is God's love?



You will only see what's so wrong with fundamental Christianity when you get tired of it and realize how intellectually dishonest it makes you as a Christian apologist. I used to be a strong apologist for the Christian faith and many of my posts as a Christian apologist are still available on the Internet. But, boy, were those posts full of intellectual dishonesty! I didn't even intend to be dishonest. It was all done subconsciously.

Eventually, I got sick and tired of defending the faith against arguments that made a lot of sense. I'm not talking about arguments made by Muslims, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, cultists, militant "atheists", or even other laymen Christians. I'm talking about logical arguments made by educated people, intellectuals, scientists, and scholars. How could I continue to defend the faith against arguments that I knew was very logical and made a lot of sense? And how dare I even challenged some of the scientific discoveries made by scientists from all over. I then realized it was no longer worth it. After months of contemplating, I eventually renounced the faith. It was no longer in me.



That key word implies an unconditional questioning of God with no fear of what conclusions it would bring to you. By the way, although definitely not recommended, one can still accept that God can be very cruel without actually rejecting Him. A lot of Calvinists are like that.



Uttering some words is worse than murder???

I really hope you don't mean it.



What happens to them? Do their children get executed?

Your God is simply a sick God especially since He is omnipotent and is easily able to prevent harm and suffering from happening.

Biblically speaking, nobody deserves God's mercy so why does God spare some from His cruel punishments but doesn't do the same for others like Aaron's sons?



The difference is that I'm not the one enabling someone's narcissism. Usually, an enabler of someone's narcissism is so because he's being manipulated by the narcissist. Your God may not be real, but the fact that He is believed by you to be real means that even a fictional character like Him can manipulate you through the words that He says in the Bible.



Short answer: NO!

I do know at least one who has NPD (my father).

Actually, it'd be quite interesting for an autistic person like me to have NPD. But (un)fortunately for you, I don't.



Only under certain circumstances would it be morally justified (like when a child is in such a great distress that he ends up cursing his abusive parents out of extreme anger and frustration).

And, anyway, cursing your parents is nothing compared to murder. If you think otherwise, then maybe it's you who needs help.



You are twisting the simple meaning of the word "curse". It's not as deep as you want it to be.

Your God is the kind of character that kills babies in cruel ways without much sympathy. Accept it.

And let's not forget the eternal hell of eternal pain and suffering.



And what if an adult son has no respect whatsoever for his father and utters disrespectful words (not necessarily swear words) at him? Does he deserve to die for that?

I still don't know what your definition of "curse" is, but I understand quite well what it means in the Bible. It implies rejection and strong hatred to the point of excluding the cursed person from one's life and wishing death upon him.



It was considered a crime back then. That's why the people in power made Yahweh regard it as so.

In this day and age, it's not generally considered a crime anymore because we have more empathy (in general) and we know better.

But this just brings me back to the point of Yahweh adapting His standards to the standards of those in power, implying that Yahweh is nothing but a fictional character that was used by those men in power to maintain their authority over the people that they were leading.



God isn't capable of teaching a 3-year-old fluent Latin in one day???

Besides, all God needs to do is give the Jews the needed understanding, nothing more. God isn't supposed to be a human being with limited teaching methods, lol.



Where was God to tell mankind about autism? It took today's world to find out about it. Or do we give all the credit to a God that we're unsure exists at all.



That comment above lacked any compassion whatsoever for the children who were executed in a very cruel manner. Your manipulative God has you well in His control.



How about God just making the children disappear into thin air without causing any pain at all?

No, He'd rather make them feel pain instead!

By the way, being stoned to death is still cruel. Have you ever watched a video of someone getting stoned to death (in Muslim countries)? I have, and it's quite disturbing. The victim takes a while to die and stop feeling pain.



I can say the same thing to you and your narcissistic God who likes to keep repeating stuff in the Bible.



You're assuming your God is the God that exists, lol.



Actually, it is quite relevant. Just as many Germans who admired Hitler refused to think of him as a monster, you do the same for your Yahweh.



The one who fails to see how narcissistic Yahweh is. By the way, I can understand where you're coming from as I was still in your position just a year ago. So I can easily see from both sides.



But Hitler is accepted as a good person by many despite what he did. Same thing for your Yahweh.

[quote=]"For your own good and sanity..." According to whom?[/quote]

According to a civilized human being living in today's world.



That's something a God who doesn't care would allow. A loving God wouldn't allow a poor child to suffer physical torture from anyone!

And we're not arguing about whether or not God CAN. We're arguing about why a supposedly LOVING God WOULD.



Your God is supposed to be in control of reality at all times so that children wouldn't have to be put to death by the sword and such.

But you want to know why it's wrong to kill children in this day and age? It's because your God is not an authority in this modern world.



Sure, keep shutting your ears to the actual points that you don't want to see.



I totally understand what the Gospel is. But this fails to address the cruelty of Yahweh. Hell, even with the Gospel, hell is still possible. That's enough to make me see how narcissistic God really is. I could care less about the "sacrifice" of Jesus, especially with narcissistic motives behind it.

Still arguing about God, I see. When are you guys going to do something important?

ruveyn

When are you? This is a section where we can discuss God whenever we feel like it. God is an important subject.