Religious inconsistency question

[Cerpin Taxt]

Morality is objective in God's eyes.

You keep using this word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

At probably the singular point in history, God gave us the perfect example of His ultimate Goodness. He allowed His Son to be murdered by men - the ultimate evil act - so that we sinners would have a path to Salvation through accepting Jesus Christ into our life - the ultimate Goodness.

Why not just give us the path without making his son die a tortuous death? Wouldn't that have been better?

God is not evil. God did not create evil.

Seriousy doubtful under common Christian assumptions about their god's alleged attributes.

It is our failing through sin that evil exists.

Who made it possible for humans to sin in the first place?

 

[sandorski]

Only mankind can be evil. We are misled by our own human failings all to easily. Trust in the Lord, seek salvation through His Son and you will see the Goodness that is Him.

Not according to the Bible.

 

[Paul98]

Morality is objective in God's eyes. It is us humans who fail.

At probably the singular point in history, God gave us the perfect example of His ultimate Goodness. He allowed His Son to be murdered by men - the ultimate evil act - so that we sinners would have a path to Salvation through accepting Jesus Christ into our life - the ultimate Goodness.

God is not evil. God did not create evil. It is our failing through sin that evil exists.

So is your God all knowing? Did your God create everything?

 

[sandorski]

Biblically speaking is all there is, so what do you mean "so what"? You don't agree with it, so it doesn't matter -- you're gonna hold to your personal view regardless. Just admit it.

You overtly and singularly focus on what you call "vile" becasue it serves your own purposes, and when given counter information (as with the post about the death of Jesus), it's "so what", all of a sudden?

It's vile because it's vile. If it wasn't vile, Hitler did no Wrong.

You realize the Bible is full of errors? Even ignoring Creation and the Flood, it is full of errors. How it can be "all there is" when you can't even trust what's in it is a question I am most curious about.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Biblically speaking is all there is, so what do you mean "so what"? You don't agree with it, so it doesn't matter -- you're gonna hold to your personal view regardless. Just admit it.

You overtly and singularly focus on what you call "vile" becasue it serves your own purposes, and when given counter information (as with the post about the death of Jesus), it's "so what", all of a sudden?

Upon what basis do you assume that your Biblical interpretation is the only correct one?

 

[Retro Rob]

It's vile because it's vile. If it wasn't vile, Hitler did no Wrong.

You realize the Bible is full of errors? Even ignoring Creation and the Flood, it is full of errors. How it can be "all there is" when you can't even trust what's in it is a question I am most curious about.

You're saying Hitler did no wrong, not me -- that's your characterization.

When I say "all there is" I mean that's the only way even you can draw any conclusion about God anyway.

 

[OverVolt]

Not according to the Bible.

Stop reading bibleskeptic.com and shit and go actually ask a priest what they think.

 

[Retro Rob]

Stop reading bibleskeptic.com and shit and go actually ask a priest what they think.

LOL -- today's skeptics aren't really skeptics.

As long as they agree with it, you can throw skepticism out of their vocabulary. They're only skeptical of opinions that differ from theirs.

 

[sandorski]

You're saying Hitler did no wrong, not me -- that's your characterization.

When I say "all there is" I mean that's the only way even you can draw any conclusion about God anyway.

1) Umm, no. That's the logical conclusion from your reasoning.
2) a)The Biblical god, yes. "God"? Not really. There are many other religions, they're all wrong, but their views on what god(s) is, are just as valid.

b) When it comes to Morals, I don't need the Bible to tell me what is Right/Wrong. The book is rather confused on this issue. I can make that judgement by myself and the result is the Bible and the god therein is vile.

 

[sandorski]

Stop reading bibleskeptic.com and shit and go actually ask a priest what they think.

Never been to that website. I have read the Bible plenty, don't need to visit anyone to tell me their interpretation of it.

 

[Retro Rob]

1) Umm, no. That's the logical conclusion from your reasoning.
2) a)The Biblical god, yes. "God"? Not really. There are many other religions, they're all wrong, but their views on what god(s) is, are just as valid.

b) When it comes to Morals, I don't need the Bible to tell me what is Right/Wrong. The book is rather confused on this issue. I can make that judgement by myself and the result is the Bible and the god therein is vile.

What other 'god' did you think we were discussing? You responded to a post concerning the God of the Bible, so unless stated otherwise, we were discussing that god, so please, spare me the games.

Humans are equally as confused on morality as you claim the Bible is -- some think suicide, gay marriage is right or acceptable, others do not. Who is right?

And why?

In other countries, child marriage is acceptable. It is illegal in America and other places for instance.

Who is right? Why?

 

[dphantom]

Never been to that website. I have read the Bible plenty, don't need to visit anyone to tell me their interpretation of it.

I doubt his intenet was that your arguments were coming from any particular web site. However, you (and many other non-beievers) do have a fundamental misunderstanding of the Bible and his suggestion of talking to a knowldgeable Christian leader would help clarify/correct your misunderstandings. Not to say you would change your own belief system, but simply to better understand what God is saying through His writings.

And before anyone else jumps in, my reading and understanding of the Bible is imperfect as well. I am human, but am attempting to understand God's Word as best I can. When I do not understand something - like the good/evil argument, I try to find the best sources of arguments I can.

I have yet to find any inconsistency once I have explored the question for myself or with help from my pastor or other Christians. And yes, even from non-Christians.

 

[sandorski]

I doubt his intenet was that your arguments were coming from any particular web site. However, you (and many other non-beievers) do have a fundamental misunderstanding of the Bible and his suggestion of talking to a knowldgeable Christian leader would help clarify/correct your misunderstandings. Not to say you would change your own belief system, but simply to better understand what God is saying through His writings.

And before anyone else jumps in, my reading and understanding of the Bible is imperfect as well. I am human, but am attempting to understand God's Word as best I can. When I do not understand something - like the good/evil argument, I try to find the best sources of arguments I can.

I have yet to find any inconsistency once I have explored the question for myself or with help from my pastor or other Christians. And yes, even from non-Christians.

What misunderstandings? Did "god" order Genocide or not? Did "god" commit Genocide or not?

 

[sandorski]

What other 'god' did you think we were discussing? You responded to a post concerning the God of the Bible, so unless stated otherwise, we were discussing that god, so please, spare me the games.

Humans are equally as confused on morality as you claim the Bible is -- some think suicide, gay marriage is right or acceptable, others do not. Who is right?

And why?

In other countries, child marriage is acceptable. It is illegal in America and other places for instance.

Who is right? Why?

You are right, there is a lot of diverse opinion on the subject. I dare say, even You have differing opinions on Morals than the Bible does. Regardless of your opinion that the Bible is what you get your Morals from.

 

[Pray To Jesus]

If by "limited" you mean our Correct perspective that Genocide is immoral, then yes. If not, then no it is evil regardless who may have ordered it.

You are a limited mortal, and obviously wrong even in this sentence. I don't agree with you with your limited perspective in this case. Keep the "our" to yourself.

 

[sandorski]

You are a limited mortal, and obviously wrong even in this sentence. I don't agree with you with your limited perspective in this case. Keep the "our" to yourself.

...and you are not a Mortal? :hmm:

 

[Retro Rob]

You are right, there is a lot of diverse opinion on the subject. I dare say, even You have differing opinions on Morals than the Bible does. Regardless of your opinion that the Bible is what you get your Morals from.

I think the problem is when people read about "genocide" in the Bible, they automatically think its wrong and there is no reason for it.

Actually, I'm willing to assume you have no issue with the death penalty (if the situation called for it) which we can and have gotten wrong many times.

Where I am getting at is this; the Bible describes God as the Ultimate Judge, can read hearts etc. He obviously can see something "wrong" that we simply are unable to see, yet when judging the actions he takes, we NEVER take that into consideration.

It's really no different than a judge in a court of law and evidence finds a person guilty and liable to death. We won't necessarily cry foul on that because of the evidence....and we sometimes don't understand all the evidence, but generally, we trust that the system did its job.

For some reason, no one is willing to extend God the same leeway -- we automatically assume he's wrong for killing (A, B, C, or whatever) and almost never take into consideration what may have caused him to execute people sometimes, or decide why someone had to die.

Yet, hypocritically, we're prefectly fine with the justice system deciding the fate of a person, and we ourselves condemn people to death without ANY facts.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

LOL -- today's skeptics aren't really skeptics.

As long as they agree with it, you can throw skepticism out of their vocabulary. They're only skeptical of opinions that differ from theirs.

I have already refuted this silly claim the last time you floated it.

It is disingenuous in the utmost to continue repeating it.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

I think the problem is when people read about "genocide" in the Bible, they automatically think its wrong and there is no reason for it.

It is certainly unnecessary. Unnecessary genocide is regarded as evil by reasonable people.

 

[Paul98]

It is certainly unnecessary. Unnecessary genocide is regarded as evil by reasonable people.

Well if all those people are going to go to heaven after they die it's the nicest thing you could do for them. Or if you knew that all these people were going to do nasty terrible things in the future it would also be justified.

But most people would agree genocide is evil and terrible.

The part about this god doing this to stop evil is because he is god and can do anything he could just make it so they didn't think the way they currently do. Thus stopping these people before they do their terrible acts would be no problem without killing them all.

 

[Retro Rob]

It is certainly unnecessary. Unnecessary genocide is regarded as evil by reasonable people.

You don't understand the account:

God promised Abraham's offspring the land of Cana before it was even occupied by those people, the Canaanites, 400 YEARS IN ADVANCE. Secondly, after the Red Sea story, a tribe of Cana (the Gibeonites) heard about that account with Egypt, and even started to serve the God of Israel and they lived.

Thirdly, they sacrificed live children through the fire with impunity -- no telling how God viewed those people or what kind of people they were in God's eyes.

So you have people who were squatters, refused to recognize God (as their own tribe DID -- so they had no excuse), and as a result of worshipping false gods, were offering up babies to those gods.

You can call it genocide if you want, but its more divine justice.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Well if all those people are going to go to heaven after they die it's the nicest thing you could do for them. Or if you knew that all these people were going to do nasty terrible things in the future it would also be justified.

I disagree that it would be "justified," because as you go on to note in the latter half of your post, there are other ways to prevent the future actions of those hypothetical people besides slaughtering them en masse.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

You don't understand the account:

I understand the story thoroughly. Rather, it is you that does not understand that nothing about what you posted changes the fact that the genocide was unnecessary.

 

[Retro Rob]

I understand the story thoroughly. Rather, it is you that does not understand that nothing about what you posted changes the fact that the genocide was unnecessary.

So you're gonna keep you head buried in the sand and ignore facts in exchange for maintaining your personal opinion.

Thanks for letting me know...

 

[Moonbeam]

We're supposed to take it for granted. You don't take it for granted that santa claus doesn't exist? It's not the same as believing he doesn't, either. What the fluff? It's improbable, not impossible.

What are we supposed to take for granted? I take it for granted that children take God and Santa Clause for granted. They stop believing in Santa when they see the evidence that what they believed in as children was only a story adults don't actually believe in. They stop believing in God for many different reasons, some that a large number of adults are deluded and still believe a fairy tail, some because what believers say they believe in is ridiculous and illogical, etc.

I am not concerned that you don't believe or with why you don't believe. The benefits of real religious faith are lost to you. As a non-believer, you have no idea what you are missing, what the psychological and health benefits of real faith are. What I am concerned with is the potential that belief in God is the best way to real knowledge of God, and it is that potential I would like to see protected by starting out with a logical and consistent faith that can better weather one's inevitable doubt.

You are in a complaining stage. You are miffed that God won't demonstrate scientifically that he exists. You have to satisfy yourself with the arrogance that you have a superior logic and reason that doesn't fall for fairy tales. Not my problem. You have closed the door on a God I do not believe exists and because of that you won't look for the one that really does exist, the one you can know with absolute certainty is the ground of your very being. God is not some being in the sky or some fancy persona. God is what is when your ego is not, when the Lover and his or her Beloved are one. It is in this state of undivided consciousness that the knowledge of God is won.

There will always be a God because this truth will always be found.