Yahweh, the baby killing God.

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by Someone7, Aug 21, 2000.

  1. Tony H2o Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    441
    [quote}
    Yes, let us thank God for sending an alleged saviour to redeem us from the natural result of the Universe that He--that is, God--made.

    Dear Lord, save me from yourself.

    So, Lori, Dear ... since you say the Bible is infallible, then what the heck is so wrong with wondering why God, who was very interactive among the Jews at the time, told them to destroy everything, including babies?

    I mean, is that it, that a Jewish raiding party is exacting God's vengeance for sins? I mean, we're all born into sin, right, so that makes it easier to exact vengeance on infants, or even in utero.

    That it happened every day, and that it happens today, is relevant in general, but not to this thread. Why? Because we're talking about an allegedly infallible book which documents God's "orders" to destroy everything and everyone in this or that place. Were Biblical figures, then, victim to the same paranoid delusions that give rise to Koresh or Jones?

    Imagine those atrocities Tab described. Well, imagine them as little as possible. But are these things holy? Are these things right? What, then, of a culture perhaps two millennia from here, that worship such an event among their canon because they believed God ordered it? What will myth speak of Hiroshima when atomic fire is ancient?
    [/quote]

    Tiassa and others, I humbly offer the following perspective.


    When God made the universe He made it perfect.
    When God created all beings that inhabit it He created them perfect.
    When God created them he gave them the ability of choice, freewill.
    And with that freewill and the power it contains the creation defied the creator.
    In doing so the creation brought disunity and sin into existence, an insidious and powerful force.
    The one who conceived of this was called Lucifer, and was majestic beyond compare.
    In his pride he would not turn from his errors and chose to oppose the Lord Most High.
    Sin entered into God's creation and contaminated it through Lucifer, and through his freewill choice to sin.
    By standing against the Lord in the power of his own freewill, by trusting in his own ability he, Lucifer managed to deceived a third of heaven into thinking that he was greater than the Lord Most High.

    So why create beings who have freewill?

    God had to create them that way. Yes that's right He had to, as discussed previously He created them according to His character and nature. God created angelic beings for the purpose of intimate fellowship, communion and service. He created them with abilities beyond instinctive reactions, abilities of choice and reasoning, abilities that He has instilled into humankind also. He made them this way so as to have meaningful interaction and dialogue with them. He also gave them boundaries that they could and should use these abilities in. Lucifer crossed the boundary and in so doing introduced sin. God set the boundaries because He in His infinite wisdom and knowledge knew that if His creation had no boundaries in which to use their God given abilities, then they would find themselves entering into areas of His character and nature that would consume them. Areas called justice, righteousness, wrath, anger and judgement, areas that are as much an integral part of God's character and nature as are mercy, forgiveness, longsuffering and love. God being fully aware of who He is and what He is choose that His creation should live according to rules and regulations laid down in love, laid down in love to protect them from entering into His judgement and all that His attributes ascribed to it call for.

    Having created the angelic hosts and humankind with the ability of freewill for a purposeful and meaningful relationship He set them boundaries that were not to be transgressed. In transgressing these boundaries sin entered into and contaminated the perfection of God's creation. In sinning and choosing to disobey the laws given in love the bond with God, the relationship and the intimate communion was severed. The instigator of destruction, Lucifer had become bitter and twisted by his failure to ascend to a place above the throne of God and in his twisted reasoning has resorted to assaulting God by driving the wedge of sin between God and humankind.

    So who's fault?

    So the question that begs answering is who is ultimately responsible?

    Is it the creation for choosing to disobey? For making the conscious decision to step outside of the boundaries laid down in love through the ability of freewill?

    Or is it the creator for giving them the freewill in the first place? For giving them the ability of choice fully knowing that they may choose to disobey yet eternally hopeful that they would use the measure of wisdom given them and decide obedience over rebellion?

    These are not very easy questions to answer, but I think we need to go there in order to gain the understanding needed. We need to look at the very root cause and effect, and we need to take into consideration the very characteristics and attributes of the players involved. Without taking it all the way back to this we will continue to argue the same arguments over and over, we will continue to look at the superficial distractions and issues without addressing the root cause and making an informed decision about our faiths and belief systems. Without doing the hard yakka we will never truly have a clear understanding of issues that appear in the word of God that on the surface appear to contradict the very author Himself.

    Who is ultimately responsible?

    Did God make a mistake? Did He in His omnipotence not see what may or would happen? Yes He saw and He created, He created according to His very person so does that make Him ultimately responsible?

    Lets consider this however in the light of who He is. An aspect of God's character is that He is creative, He being a God who is true to Himself must therefore create, to do otherwise, to suppress this ability would be paramount to Him contradicting Himself. I have said many times that this has never happened and never will. Another part of His character, another aspect of His person is the aspect of His love. He is a God of love and so He in return longs for a creation that can share in this love, a creation that can reciprocate from hearts that are uninhibited and inspired by their creator, for them to have intimate fellowship and communion in His love and to love in return so that He might pour out His blessing upon them.

    So God created them and He created them to fulfil the vary requirements and desires of His very character and nature, it was His attributes that dictated the design, it was His character the stipulated the very traits that were needed. And so God created them in His image according to His character, nature and attributes, and in accordance with this the ability of freewill to fulfil these very requirements.

    So in doing this, in meeting the very requirements that His character, nature and attributes dictated did God make a mistake?
    Did He by being true to that which He is err? Did He by allowing us to be made in His image do something wrong? Or did we as part of the creation made perfect cause our own demise? God created us outside of Himself, as an external fully functional creature, a creature that He chose to make with the abilities He (dare I say) HAD TO give it. Yes God Had to, God does have limits, these are limits laid down by His very person, having limits yet being omnipotent sounds almost contradictory but He is limitless within the confines of the limits dictated by His person. So having limits that He alone can meet God set limits in love that His creation must and have the abilities to meet.

    So again I ask who is at fault? Again I throw up the question who is responsible? Again I ask is the Creator or the creation? T6 once drew an analogy of God letting His pets run amuck and thereby being ultimately responsible for its action, this was a very good analogy. God understands His responsibility in our abilities, however we are the ones responsible for our actions and there effects. Let me explain with a real life story:

    In the city I live we recently had a case tried where a man who owned a number of large dogs was being held accountable for their actions, actions that resulted in the savage and brutal death of an elderly woman.

    The man involved was ultimately found guilty of the actions of his animals, for one reason. That reason being that he failed in his duty of care to provide adequate confines for the animals to live within. He essentially let them roam uninhibited throughout the area, he set them no boundaries and having no constraints the animals knew no discipline.

    So how does this relate to God? How does this relate to human suffering? How does this relate to God's judgement of seemingly innocent lives?

    God is the dog owner and we as creation are the dogs

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    However unlike the individual who let his animals roam wild God has set boundaries for His creation to operate within, His word and the law established in Love. So unlike the owner who allowed his dogs to roam, God has set up a boundary in love. If you are familiar with animals and know how to train them and earn their respect you will know that the best method is affection. A dog that is treated with affection and consistent instruction will be the most loyal companion to a man. You could have a property with known boundaries and never need a fence because the animals loyalty would dictate its obedience. It would stick to your side when you say come, it will stay on its bed when instructed to do so, it will swim in freezing waters at your command and it would jump through fire at your signal. Why because it loves and obeys its master, and if the master of the animal loves the beast then the beast will trust the master who would never cause it wilful harm.

    Such it is with God, in my last post I tried to show how in doing so, in laying down the law in love for the protection of the creation from itself sin became apparent. The law served to show people the holiness of the God they served, the law stood not only for man but as a reflection of God's character and nature, as an indicator of His attributes. The books of the law and the prophets have entwined within them the very plan of Gods eternal plan for mankind. God knew we would fall, yet as difficult as it is to wrap our minds around He had to make us and He had to allow the fall. God could have intervened, He could have changed the course of history at any one point in time as we understand it. And He has, He has done this time and again and will continue to do so in accordance with His character and nature. We however are fickle in our characters and nature and so our freewill choices equate to changes that are seldom in accordance with Gods will. Even before sin entered our sphere choices and decisions were made that have had a ripple effect on humanity throughout the ages, choices that resulted in changes, changes that have resulted in loss and destruction, loss and destruction brought about at times because of Gods judgement, brought about because we listened to the destroyer in place of the Lord Most High.

    Freewill = choice.

    Choice = change.

    The outcome was a choice, a freewill decision made by beings created that stood external to God. When saying that I am saying that the angelic beings and humankind were created by God not to be dictated to but to be fellowshipped with in a unity of love. They were created to walk closely with Him yet external to Him, to consider, to ponder, to learn, to grow, to seek, to understand, to love and to be loved, to choose and decide beyond instinctive reactions to external stimuli, to be perfect and they were granted the abilities and attributes that God Himself possessed to achieve and maintain this, they were created to bless and to be blessed, to honour and to be honoured.

    At the dawn of time the events that transpired, transpired.

    God fulfilled perfectly the role He played in the creation of the beings involved, He created them perfect yet with the ability to be imperfect. God knew that at any time (if I can apply that term to the realm of the eternal one) one of His creations could and would eventually stumble and fall, was Lucifer the first one to do so? I would surmise not, I would consider that God in His mercy had the ability to forgive any transgression that was committed in ignorance, that His loving kindness would cover a multitude of unknown sins even when the transgressor became aware of their error. I would consider that God had exercised this ability prior to the fall of Lucifer and that in Lucifer the whole scenario changed. It changed in that Lucifer would not humble himself and accept God's forgiveness for to so would be an admission of fault in the light of the boundaries established by God, the Law. Lucifer was a majestic being, a creature within creation that stood in splendour and was beheld as most beautiful amongst creation. A creature who was seen as immensely powerful and wise, who was seen as established in the ways of the almighty and as being closest to the throne of God. A position of great honour, a position of great power, a position of immense responsibility, a position of pride? Yes, pride crept in and was found in Lucifer, by the measure of his wisdom the one who was closest to God aspired to be like God, he saw his position and in comparison to all of creation concluded that he and he alone in all his beauty was deserving of the praise and admiration that was given him. Lucifer lost sight of the reality that with God sustaining him, without the one who created him upholding him then he was naught. In loosing sight of this and allowing himself to gloat in his pride he determined that he could be better and greater than the Lord Most High. And then sin was found in him, but because of his pride, because of his position of great honour, because he did not want to be seen as humbling himself and lowering his stature before the Almighty, because he stood in arrogance and choose by the act of his free will not to repent from that which was consuming him, because of this he moved outside of Gods love and under His judgement. Outside of God forgiveness and into His wrath. Lucifer choose and he choose poorly, however in mercy God did not completely destroy this being. God choose to humble this being by taking away the very things that caused his pride to mount up within him. And even then having been stripped of his status, having been cast down the wicked one choose again to defy the word and law of God. In spite and in hatred he set about to drag down as much of creation that he could influence to the same level he had fallen. He became know as Satan and he set about to assault the very character and nature of the Lord Most High. Satan set about a plan to confront the very attributes of his creator, having dwelt close to the throne he knew the very limits that God Himself constrained Himself to, and knowing this Satan set about to assault these limits in an effort to cause the Most High Himself to error.

    And so we see the accounts within Scripture of God's judgement, judgement at times that appears harsh and ruthless. But judgement that was forced before God and according to God's character and nature demanded that He act. And what are we in actuality seeing? What we are seeing time and again is where the evil one orchestrates humankind by their own freewill into a position of Gods judgement. He moves us into the wrath of God in an effort to destroy and malign the character of God and to confuse people as to who God truly is and what He the Lord Almighty has actually done for humanity. Satan does so by appealing to our fallen natures, through enticing us like he enticed Eve and like she enticed Adam. And which of us has never been affected by it? Which of us can honestly say I am faultless and perfect in the sight of God? We have all succumbed to the disease, we have all tasted of it and we if we are 100% honest with ourselves will look within and see how it still affects us daily.

    So who is ultimately responsible for all of this? Who is it that will ultimately take responsibility for the actions of the evil one and for the actions of all mankind? Who is it that will bear the burden? Who is it that will set straight all atrocities all destruction all pain all suffering? Who will take the judgement upon himself for all these things? Who is capable of doing such a thing? Will God abandon us to the misery of our own mess? Is it God's responsibility, who ultimately has to take the responsibility? God laid down the Law in love to protect His creation from itself, was it not the creation itself that transgressed and chose to ignore the boundaries that God established? Should they themselves not bear the weight of their decisions? Or should God?

    Tiassa keeps saying that God made it God should fix it, and yes Tiassa is correct to a point but blind to the conclusion.

    As much as we are responsible for our individual action and the effect that they have from generation to generation, as much as we deserve the penalty of rebellion that awaits us all, as much as we have inflicted pain the law of the harvest dictates that we must suffer likewise, unless someone takes the burden of our suffering upon themselves. As much as we try to blame the evilone and much as he tries to blame the Holy one we, each and every one of us are responsible for our actions and the results of those actions, God included. Do you think that for one moment that God would forsake us? That He, Father, Son and Holy Ghost would abandon that which He created to eternal damnation and destruction? Do you think that even know that He has built into each and everyone of us the ability to withstand sin that we alone are capable of doing so? Doing so when that which we relied upon for our strength to withstand has been severed because of sin, that thing being intimacy with our creator. What a dismal and appalling situation, what hopelessness would confront us and drive people to suicide at the though of no tomorrow, would drive them to paranoia at the concept of no eternal hope, of being abandoned by God. As much as we are due the wages of our ways there is a hope, a hope and a plan that was laid down at the foot of eternity.

    Death, destruction, pain, sorrow these are all the works of our own hands, drive along a course by the manipulator of humanity Satan.

    But God seeing all that would transpire, knowing that His creation would slip from the place that it was created for had in place a plan of restoration.

    That plan being for one who was as faultless as a sacrificial lamb, one who could empathise with fallen creation and suffer through their daily toil, one who knew no sin, one who lived and reflected in the human form the very character and nature of the Lord Most High, one who was part of His very being. This one, the only one possible would take their place, He would be the stand in for all of creations fall. This one would bear the eternal burden of our sin, He would take the wages of sin and death due to us for our transgressions and He and He alone would make atonement for them. He would die the cruel and brutal death that we all deserved, He would suffer the agony and the shame, He would take it and He would die in it. And die He did.

    But the message of hope and great promise is that He arose, death could not contain Him, sin could not constrain Him, He arose as He died, innocent and He ascended to the right hand of the Father and is enthroned in all glory and honour. He hold the keys to death and life and those who call on His name, those who are restored to the Lord Most High through this mans sacrifice will never taste the sting of death or the bitter suffering according to the wages of their sins.

    Jesus said:

    I am the way the truth and the life, no man comes to the Father but by me.

    He spoke the truth!

    God has not washed His hands of the creature that He is responsible for, infact in place of walking away from us He gave His all for us to remedy the disease of sin.

    John 3:16
    For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, so that all that believe on Him shall not perish by have everlasting life.


    Gods Son thinking it nothing to be equal with God humbled Himself and took on the form of a man. He did so to be obedient to the Fathers love and eternal plan of salvation, He did so as part of the responsibility that God Most High took upon Himself for our errors.

    Please try to see what has happened and is happening, please trust Him with your heart. He will restore and renew if we only but trust and obey. He will heal and hold, He will make living waters to flow within you, He will cause a barren and dry place to spring forth with new life. He, Jesus will again make straight a path for you to walk in unity and in the presence of the Lord Most High who dwells in a place of Holiness, so Holy that the only way in is through the blood of the lamb.




    Side note:

    Another part of the problem we have here is that people are trying to comprehend why did God order His people, the Jewish nation to exercise His judgement. There are things in the Bible that make my head reel to, I don't straight away understand them and at times the look down right horrible. Infinity has graciously pointed a few out to me that I hadn't seen before, thanx

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    There is a lot to try to understand and well I'm about outta time now, so if time allows I will get back to you all on why God did it this way. What was He showing us? What spiritual significance did the nation of Israel represent? Etc, etc.

    But for now please read and reread the above. I know I've skirted of some bits and I've repeated myself a lot but I hope most are use to my style of discussion to see past such things. Please try to get the feel of what I believe it maybe that God is trying to say.

    Until later

    Allcare

    Tony H2o



    I don't consider you shallow searcher, in fact I can see a depth of searching. You have asked valid questions from a human perspective and deserve valid answers. I wish I had more time to discuss with you, Tiassa, Mooncat, Infinity and others. I find the questions you ask challenging and that they drive me to my Lord for understanding of my own on occassions. But I would ask that you try to see who He truly is. You know what I'm saying so I shaln't ramble on, wish I knew what else to say.

    Allcare

    Tony
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. MoonCat Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    400
    Searcher,

    The book is new; "The Jesus Mysteries: Was the Original Jesus A Pagan God?" by Tim Freke and Peter Goody. Most fascinating is that the authors are Christian!

    I hear it demonstrates how the story of Mithras is virtually the same story of Jesus. I haven't bought a copy of it, so I can't say if it's good or not, but I thought of you instantly when I heard about it. (At triplemoon, 'between the worlds' forum, actually!)

    Tony,

    You are such a poetic soul! I have a comment though.

    You drew an analogy between irresponsible dog owners and God. You basically say that we are the dogs, God is the owner, and he's built a fence of love to keep us safe, right?

    Okay, but here's what I'm seeing - God built a fence alright, but he made a few mistakes. He made a gate that won't latch, and the wall is way to low. End result - too many dogs jumping the fence, and the mailman sued for dogbite. God has tried to fix the problem by poisoning all the escaped dogs in the past, that didn't work very well though, so he hung a dog in the middle of the yard as a warning sacrifice to the rest of the dogs - this is what (symbolically) will happen to you mutts if you jump the fence. Sure, some of the dogs were affected by this, they stand around and hang their heads in reverence for their deceased pal and count their lucky stars there is a fence, even if it is lacking. The rest of the dogs, on the other hand, don't trust God not to hang or poison them next - some stay out of fear, others escape and stay as far away as possible.

    I'm one of the dogs that escaped (actually I'd say I was born to a pair of escapee's), and now hope that it wasn't actually God that hung my relative to death just to show me the possible consequences of my own escape. Sure, I could get hit by a car out here, but at least I'm not captive to a capricious master that rules with an iron fist.

    Blessings Tony.
    ~MC
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Stretch Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    148
    Hiya Tony!

    Trust you to give the most logical Christian answer to a real tricky paradox. Yup ... I understand ... but I find myself kicking against the assumed/presumed logic of the problem being confined within the solution. All I can do, to try and undertsand, is to look within myself and decide what I would do in one of the barbaric OT situations, if I was an omnipotent Supreme Being acting from my infinite and unconditional love.

    And every time and in every situation, I come up with a forgiving emotion, and a solution of an entirely different nature. I don`t think I would have to slaughter anyone ever! (i am love ... I am omnipotent ... I created free will ... I created the concept of choice ... I created the potential and consequences of trangression ... I created sin ... etc, etc, etc,)

    Then if that is my handle on the situation, then in who`s image was I created?

    Nice to see you here ... you are missed.

    Take care
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Lori Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    Searcher,

    Ok, scratch the shallow, but keep the literal. And I believe it's literal history, I'm just saying that I don't think you're digging very deep to find meaning in it. You've been looking for a relationship with Jesus for 43 years, and you still haven't got one. Dag, I thought I was slow. LOL! Kidding...it's just that if you're looking for Him in a seminary school, or in a church, I could have saved you a lot of wasted time. He's not there. And I know that you're not looking to know Him now either, so has it really been that intense of a search? Did you ever really want to get to know Him, or did anyone explain how? It's all over the Bible, if you studied it. I know first hand that if your intentions are sincere, and you really pray, and seek Him, that He's there. It's a law. I mean, I went to church and tried to "get religion" when I was younger, but it didn't make a lot of sense to me, and I got turned off by the church. I wasn't ever doing it for the right reasons. Someone who doesn't do it for the right reasons is almost dangerous. They're the people that turn us off. Blind faith, spoon-feeding, joiner mentality isn't being born again. I can't help but think that it's not supposed to be something you just learn in a book or from a lecture, it has to be something that you live through. What matters most is where your heart is at. If you don't want to know Jesus, you never will.

    ------------------
    You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.
     
  8. Lori Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    Tony,

    That was an awesome post. I wanted to mention something too, about God, and the literal description of emotionality attributed to Him in the OT. I said that this was written in a way that we as humans can relate to, but we have to realize that God isn't "emotional" like we are emotional. From all that I know about faith, and your spirit as a human, it is emotions that can lead us to sin. Our emotions are dangerous, and blinding many times. Most times, to really do the right thing in faith, you have to let go of them, or ignore them. Your spirit is not emotional, and neither is God...emotions are of the flesh...unconditional love is not an "emotion", it's a law. There's a difference. And it's perpetuated by an honest realization of truth, and not by a "feeling". I thought that point may help explain my perspective regarding the OT.

    ------------------
    You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.

    [This message has been edited by Lori (edited August 28, 2000).]
     
  9. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,884
    But what I fail to understand is how any of this applies to God ordering the deaths of infants, as per Someone's topic.

    For instance, (if I may ...):

    This from Lori's 8/26, 10.31 pm post to Searcher.

    Great, I understand that Jesus did quite a bit for humanity when he died. I'm even willing to wager we've got different perspectives on what he actually intended and accomplished.

    But I need a direct connection to how that answers Someone's questions about seemingly unnecessary atrocities in the Bible. Someone, please, demonstrate how the act referred to, or any other similar act, becomes right. Otherwise, I'm left grasping at straws of rhetorical speculation which run the gamut from amusingly and pointedly infantile all the way to flat-out offensively detailed constructions, and very few of them are complimentary to the god in question.

    Tony, I owe better than a simple one-liner in response to your post. But, since a one-liner is all I've got for the time being, I will toss it onto the table:

    Was God really all that surprised when Eve ate the fruit?

    I'm sorry, but if God knows what's in our hearts, it isn't after the fact, lest he's just like us in that respect.

    Was it that God "had to" make the universe as such? What rules limit God's infinite possibility?

    Yes, God knew what Satan would do. And, yes, God went forward. It seems to me that sin and rebellion are a necessary part of the plan, so why does God take offense?

    Right now, the only purpose it seems Christ fulfilled was to issue the promise that because of him, God would never have to order a nation to destroy another nation to effect the wages of sin? (Yes, I know that's wrong, but it's one of the few ideas left unsullied by myriad considerations.)

    Anyway, I'll try to be more useful, but ....

    thanx,
    Tiassa

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!




    ------------------
    We are unutterably alone, essentially, especially in the things most intimate and important to us. (Ranier Maria Rilke)
     
  10. Rambler Senior Member Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    509
    Lori,

    You make absolutley NO SENSE.

    According to you god created sin (universal balance, or whatever you want to call it), Sin is something we CAN'T avoid and if we fail to avoid it were damned, the price being a shitty world to live in (and a whole lot of inoccent non christain lives lost, damned if you do damned if you don't).

    If your father paralised you tied you to a train track directley in the way of a speeding train, then he removed the train driver and said to you "jump out of the way of that train, if you don't YOU'LL be resposible for the death of thousands of people" would you still be able to paint that up as a being righteous???? just because your father wanted it that way, or would there be a moment of clarity where you saw that kind of an act as evil???

    I have read most debates on here about christainity, debated about it with friends etc and I believe I'm slowly coming to a view about this religion that I'm comfortable with...it seems to me that christanity is a means to avoid responsibilty, it allows you to commit attrocities be an all round asshole and as long as you keep telling yourself that some unknown supergod forgives you for it then you can calm your own conscience and all is well. Thats a cop out and a cowards way out.

    If people only listened to their conscience instead of replacing it with demons and gods and bullshit scary stories of righteous genocide I believe humanity would have a hope, as long as the majority avoid guilt by looking for forgivness in fairytale gods we will never reach the moral ground that these religons are supposed to uphold.
     
  11. Lori Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    Tiassa,

    Do you mean right or good? And I don't think that you're that far off in your assessment of what Jesus did for us when He died? And don't you get it Tiassa? God made the universe the BEST way for us...all of us.

    Rambler,

    If we fail to avoid sin, we are Christ, so I wouldn't stress about that one...that doesn't "damn" you. So you agree that the shit in the world comes from sin? Wow, that's a start! You're right. That's why we should try not to. Um...that's like the whole point of the religion!

    I'm not sure who you're referring to when your talking about Christianity as an "asshole license", but it's definately not me. I was much more of an asshole before I got saved! LOL! For me, honestly, it's the exact opposite situation than what you've described. My faith has seriously changed my life for the better, by far. I really do feel like I'm becoming a new person. It's for real. Anyone who uses Christianity as an excuse to hurt someone isn't being a Christian. Did you know that? Does anyone out there know that? Hello...hello....I've been able to forgive some people that have hurt me, and gotten rid of a lot of anger, and stop hating myself, and being self destructive, and copping out. I've learned a lot about myself, and how my perspective has been really f'd up in the past about what is true and what's not in this life. I've learned to be a lot stronger than I ever was. I thought of an analogy today about "getting religion". It's like, I know it's hard to remember, but when we're children, we all start out as innocent and trusting and loving unconditionally. And as we grow, we get hurt along the way, and it makes us a little harder, and a little angry. And we get hurt some more, and we get a little harder, and angrier. And eventually we end up being people that we never really wanted to be. And getting religion is like trying to take yourself back to the same innocent and trusting and loving perspective that you had back then, only knowing what you know now. Getting religion is the hardest thing I've ever done...and I've done some relatively hard things in my life.


    ------------------
    You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.

    [This message has been edited by Lori (edited August 28, 2000).]
     
  12. Flash Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    771
    Hey Lori, What are you doing up so late???? LOL
     
  13. Searcher Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    651
    Tony,

    Why is it I always get the urge to hug you whenever I see posts from you?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    It isn't because we believe the same, obviously. I dunno, maybe it's because you come through as being genuine and warm, and all that good stuff. It's good to see you're still with us, Tony.

    Anyway, I know how you feel when you say you want me to see your God as you do. But I really don't think it's possible. What I hear from believers and what I read in the OT concerning your God are usually two different things, and often impossible to reconcile.

    In a way, your God reminds me of my own father when I was a child. He was a stern perfectionist, and rather harsh in his dealings with me and my sisters. And I remember the way he would spew his hatred for the human race in general, but other races in particular, and always at the dinner table, especially about blacks and Mexicans, and how they should all be shot and dumped into the sea, and on and on, ad nauseum. When I got sick enough of his ignorant rantings (and feeling extraordinarily bold), I would sometimes try to point out the good things that this black person or that Mexican person had done, and ask him how he could make these awful blanket statements about people he'd never even met and knew so little about, and whoa - then I really got to hear some yelling and name-calling - this time directed at me!!

    Well, Tony, when I read about the OT God, I can't help but think of my father - I mean, they almost sound like the same being in many ways. I'm sorry Tony, but just like I stood up to my father, I must stand up to your God or any other being that demands the slaughter of innocents. I really feel that worshipping this "God" out of fear for my eternal soul is just wimping out, in which case my soul will be lost anyway. Can you understand that? I know you don't see him the same way I do, and I'm not sure why when you've read the same stories in the OT that I've read. But that's the best I can do to explain it.

    ------------------
    An ye harm none, do what ye will.
     
  14. Rambler Senior Member Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    509
    Lori, you said:

    --------------
    Anyone who uses Christianity as an excuse to hurt someone isn't being a Christian. Did you know that? Does anyone out there know that?
    --------------

    I agree, thats not really christain...if you added: "then asks GOD (not the person they've hurt) for forgivness so that they can stop feeling guilty for being pricks" then THAT would be christain.

    My whole point (granted I didn't make very clear) is that christainity is like a security blanket...you know where you can allow yourself to be an arse and then ask god to forgive you. That way you can avoid answering for your shortcomings and just ask "GOD" to forgive you..you know if you ask for his forgivness you'll have it...I lost count of how many times I heard that when I was at school (catholic school).

    I don't think I'm too far off the mark in thinking that people who turn to religion for forgivness (of their own shortcomings) are people who can't find it in themselves to forgive THEMSELVES, or be forgiven for shit they've done to others. I don't accept that I need to be saved in christ...I should be saving myself after all I'm the one who's gonna pay the price if I do anything wrong. If I kill a child I have to live with that, finding god isn't going to change that fact, if I treat people around me like shit then I have accept the consequenses of my actions....god isn't going to do shit and saying I saved myself in god is really just passing the buck...I'm probably going around in circles but I just can't find the words for what I want to say...I guess I'm calling christainty a form of escapism...like a good book, or bottle of wine or some FINE weed. You know your having some problems etc don't really feel strong enough to face up to them so you have a drink, or a cone, or run away completely from it and start talking to "GOD", blow it if I don't feel people (including myself) can forgive me for what I've done I'll ask something (that won't answer me) for forgivness...I guess thats the comfort of a silent god, you can believe anything (like that all is cool, you are forgiven) because he ain't gonna tell you your wrong...On the other hand if you were judged by those who you were a shit to it wouldn't be so easy would it??. Thats what I meant by copping out, and cowardise in my above post.


    BTW I don't believe the shit in the world comes from sin...it comes from people.

    [This message has been edited by Rambler (edited August 29, 2000).]
     
  15. Stretch Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    148
    Lori

    Our emotions are a gift of God. Why deny them. And why were we given them in the first place? They are the essence of that something, which sets us apart from the rest of creation, and makes us unique as creative, introspective, conscious beings. The alleged sons of God.

    Lori, I can understand and feel deep compassion for the unfortunate experiences you have had in life, and I cannot help feeling that religion is your crutch to find the sense of it all. Maybe you are in a state of denial, as to your own God given inner strength. But really, that`s just life. It deals you different hands all the time, enhancing your growth in the ineffable cosmos. Love is totally and definitely an “emotion” You have to stop denying yourself your legitimate humanity and the accompanying emotions. You were NOT born in sin, you are NOT a sinner, because a body of words tell you such. The sh*t in the world is not because of the Christian dogmatic concept of “Sin” ! It is just selfish mankind, living in a material world (for thousands of years) being out of touch, with their inherent spiritual aspect. Look into your heart, you will understand the truth about sin. Trust that truth. As you feel, so you are. There is nothing wrong with that. That is part of the absolutely natural and sublime Grand Design. The joy of which one can sometimes taste.

    I was not born in sin. I reject that. I have done wrong (how do I know that?) and I have done right (how do I know that?) At the end of the day, I strive towards the light, and try not to repeat the wrongs I have committed. That honest intent, is the transcendent manifestation of Truth. And only I can forgive myself.

    “Remove away that blackening church,
    Remove away that marriage hearse …
    Remove away that man of blood,
    You`ll quite remove the ancient curse.”

    Take care
     
  16. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,884
    Lori--

    I mean right as in right and proper. I would be nitpicking to ask which definition of good; there are some subtle differences.

    But my point is that God ordered it, His people performed it, therefore, it is good. Unfortunately, though, that idea just doesn't work for me.

    One of the possibilities that I carry in my own bag o'notions is the eternal atheistic idea that humans create and sustain their gods. In this sense, we might look at the murder of the Amelekites academically, and determine a few possibilities for the purposes of argument. Namely, I can envision an historical period in which blood was the only currency of a feuding economy--these conditions play themselves out time and again, a strong indicator that this is familiar behavior to the human race. I can envision a conflict existing between the Hebrews and the Amelekites, and the emergence of an event of "sin", that is, an offense against the Hebrews by the Amelekites which warranted, by the contemporary standard, a harsh response. So the Jews pick up their weapons, trounce the Amelekites, and trump the glory of god; it is recorded in a written history, and the compressed version says they did it, not "for" God, but as per God's order. For a similar process, read Song of Roland, in which Christian soldiers rout a Saracen (Moor) army, believing that God itself has empowered the mighty sword Durendal. Or the notion of the Hebrews carrying the Ark of the Covenant into battle.

    And this is the reason literalism is a sticky issue, which might be one of the issues at the heart of this thread. I can believe the process I've described above, and I'm quite certain that you're bright enough to conceive of it, but it's not explained that way in the Bible, and suddenly we have a choice: literal or not? (BTW, I did read your latest post in Evolution v. Creation, please accept that I'm trying to consider that perspective here as well. If I miss ... give me time to work the pieces together; I had, prior to your 8/28 post, believed you to be rather quite the literalist, though that was as confusing an assumption as whether or not I've talked to Jesus

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    )

    Where I agree with Someone's topic post is only within a literalist sphere; I honestly believe the notion of a literal Bible is one of the biggest hinderances to progress. It seems that literalism often breeds that segment of the Christian faithful that you and I both decry, though rarely in harmony. And there, I think, is the key to this thread. It's also part of my problem with the Devil. With the Devil, people want God to be goodness and strength and purity, and thus have trouble reconciling that the God of Goodness and Salvation is behind the tragic passing of a child, or killing of a mother. Hence, the Devil, though, as we've never been able to pin down clearly for you, the assertion that the Devil is unnecessary, and the result (imho) that many, many Christians are wasting their breath trying to protect themselves from that Devil. Likewise, with literalism, I see people experiencing difficulty reconciling the God of Salvation with the angry, jealous God that led the Jews through exile.

    All of this leads toward notions of right, proper, or good.

    God created the earth, and it was good. God separated the day from the night, and it was good. The tricky question: God ordered the Jews to destroy the Amelekites, and so they did, and it was ... good?

    And that's all I'm really after with this. If the destruction of every living soul in the kingdom was good, according to God ... well, I don't see how mass destruction ever serves the purposes of a God who is supposed to be harmony and light.

    I only wanted to have a couple of brief comments on the following:

    This, taken as it stands above, is a perfectly acceptable statement with which I agree wholeheartedly. If I start inserting specific context, say, this particular god, or that particular goddess, then it starts to fall apart a little. But only a little.

    You've heard me ramble on forever about the triangles, before. That's essentially it; that once "god" put the formula into action, what resulted was the only thing that could. That's essentially my take on it.

    * And I wanted to spend a couple of pennies on "asshole license". Regardless of its intent, it seems the effect of confession and forgiveness, indeed, of the very redemption itself, is to encourage the faithful to go forward without deeper consideration of the effects of their actions. If you steal a bar of soap from a store, it's pretty much the same thing, sin-wise, as stealing a bar of soap from a friend's bathroom, right? Yet the effect of confession and forgiveness often encourages a mindset where Bob the Christian will confess and receive absolution for shoplifting, and then pop over to Jack's house, where he rips off a couple of things to suit his fancy. Not a fan of Catholic confessions? (Well, they weren't the point, but I thought I'd head that one off before it distracted us.) Someone trusting Jesus to lead them to salvation ... maybe he receives clarity about an affair he's having with his secretary, but he has a hard time translating that epiphany to the affair he's having with his wife's sister. Different circumstances, therefore, it must (roll your eyes with me on that

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ) be a different sin. The problem gets bigger when the sins transgress one's immediate environment (family, friends, &c.) Consider the fact that, ten years after 20-08 (Springfield, Oregon), the people of Oregon are once again being asked to vote for a stupid, hateful ballot measure and actualize the vision of one wrongly-prioritized, self-described Christian. Lon Mabon does not see himself as encouraging divisiveness. In fact, his Jesus sees nothing to forgive, since the presence of his enemies is the source of his divisiveness. Ten years the people of Oregon have been saying no, and because it's not the whole state this time, but only a county, or not the whole state, but just the teachers ... it's the same thing. People say no to discrimination, but his faith sees no trespasses, and thus encourages an encore performance. Lon Mabon, Donald Wildmon, David Roever ... these men lead brigades of Christians to similar machinations. They believe they have Jesus on their side, and have no reason to stop what they do; truly, an "asshole license".

    (I stick my nose in here because I've made the same accusation about redemption and forgiveness before. It's sort of a sticking point w/me.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    )

    thanx,
    Tiassa

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    ------------------
    We are unutterably alone, essentially, especially in the things most intimate and important to us. (Ranier Maria Rilke)
     
  17. Tony H2o Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    441
    Testing, a few probs at this end getting updates.
     
  18. Someone7 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    123
    “Your attempt failed.”

    Too bad.

    “You made the claim. Substantiate it.”

    Ok, I’ll make a holy book for atheism, hehe.

    “Lame? If you can't provide a source for your epistemology then don't appeal to moral arguments. The problem with this is that in order to appeal to a moral argument you must claim infinite knowledge. You can chalk it up to evolution if you like but you still have the epistemology problem.”

    Yes, just because I don’t have a holy book to base my life and actions on, I can’t discuss moral arguments. Good reasoning. Of course you don’t have to have infinite knowledge to appeal to moral arguments, when you got a bible by your side, hehe.

    “The Bible. Any attempt tp discredit logic must use logic to discredit it. Our thoughts do correspond to reality. This has been shown over and over again. Atheists just have trouble finding a source for knowledge. The problem is you can't use moral arguments because you can't substantiate any of your moral premises.”

    Any attempt to disagree with someone on morality must use holy book versus holy book you mean, logic has little to do with it.

    “I hope you don't speak for all atheists when you say stuff like that. I know the Bible is God's word. Why? Well I just do.”

    Granted, but what else can I say when the atheist holy book hasn’t been written yet?

    “Are we assuming macro-evolution as a fact?”

    Are we assuming supernatural creation by Yahweh as fact? Macro-evolution (Large-scale evolution occurring over geologic time that results in the formation of new taxonomic groups) isn’t an indisputable fact, but speciation (The evolutionary formation of new biological species, usually by the division of a single species into two or more genetically distinct ones) is. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

    “Would you mind defining bad? Or does bad mean "hindering life" in this scenario? Atheism tend to make up new meanings of words to suit their needs.”

    Bad has many definitions, but the one I’m referring to is this: Most severe or unfavorable.

    “he Bible says God "hardwired" his laws onto our hearts. At least Christians have a source for their epistemology. Much more plausible than saying we know so because we just do.”

    Granted, saying we know so because we do is lame (I didn’t quite mean to make it come off like that, but oh well). Again, but what else can I say when you’re demanding the equivalent of the bible?

    “You might want to restudy the fall. If they didn't know of good and evil how could they be held accountable for eating the fruit. Not totally sure but I think you have to dig deep on that one.”

    Maybe you should restudy the fall. Genesis 3:5 - For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. Hehe, your source of epistemology comes from a piece of fruit.

    “And in your mind we know this because we just do.”

    You have asked for (or battered me because atheism or I don’t have a magical source of epistemology) in every single response so far. I don’t know this because I do, I just took a guess. Maybe I went a little far in saying that “in your mind, without it, there is no way of knowing what is right and wrong”, but am I wrong?

    “There is a much better answer to the original question asked in this thread. I am sorry, I didn't see it as a sincere question. More like an attack on my petty women killing baby murdering God who I love more than anything else in the entire world and is the source of my love. Its an insult to me and most other Christians. A person honestly asking how could a loving God possibly do that or someone just wanting to discuss the issue is different. But when your not sincere and "attacking' I, as I said, will hit your stuff in its weakest spot. I am sorry you all had to see this type of answer from me.”

    Yes, it was sort of an attack, but not so much as to piss anyone off, but more like to stimulate discussion. I can assure you, me not having a holy book to base my moral arguments on isn’t the weakest part of my argument. Actually, I find it laughable that you would assume Yahweh gave morals to us, it makes me wonder if you even read any of Genesis. I’d rather have no source for my epistemology than saying it came from a couple of people eating a piece of fruit.
     
  19. Rambler Senior Member Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    509
    Hi All,

    If your looking for an athiests holy book then I would suggest that EVERY non-fiction book ever written could be considered a volume of the Athiests Holy book.
     
  20. Someone7 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    123
  21. Shadowflame Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    77
    Isn't our own source of "right" and "wrong" come from our own tribal roots? For example, to kill someone is considered "wrong" because killing would hurt the entire tribe, losing a valuable resouce, which could have been used for gathering food, or spreading genes. To kill a family member is considered extremly wrong because that would be destroying your genes, stopping the productive flow. Basically the same thing with all forms of homicide. Stealing is bad because if your caught, that means that you have taken "food" that could have been consumed by another. This makes them angry, because now they don't have a source of food. Gluttony is bad because it takes up resources that could have been used for the whole. It sounds very simple, but thats what it is. However, killing an enemy in war is good, because it eliminates competition, which could destroy your tribe in turn. Our sense of morals comes from generations of trial and error, the sense of togetherness of the entire human race and self-defense. Just a theory

    ------------------
    Questions? Comments? Concerns?
     
  22. Tony H2o Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    441
    Flash

    Consider it done my friend.


    Tony

    [This message has been edited by Tony H2o (edited August 30, 2000).]
     
  23. Greenwood priest Registered Member

    Messages:
    16
    Can we try this again, just one more time? Before any of you answer this post, please read it very carefully, then go back and read it again. I have yet to see anyone actually address the original question. 1Samuel, 15: 2 & 3 says "Thus saith the Lord of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt. Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass." This is not about sin, or man's evil against man, or Jesus's forgivness of sin, or Lucifer or Satan or anything else but one point only. This quote from the Old Testament clearly shows Yahweh ORDERING the murder of infants.

    This is not the only genocidal act in the Old Testament, but let's just focus on this one section. Obviously, mercy has no part in this act. Where is there a semblance of justice in this? How does Yahweh differ from Adolph Hitler?

    As I said at the beginning, read this post carefully, then read it again before you answer.

    ------------------
    Greenwood priest

    [This message has been edited by Greenwood priest (edited August 31, 2000).]
     

Share This Page