Why do Christians make God out to be dumb?

TROR,Christians present God as unable (or unwilling) to speak. Effectively dumb. So then, guys like you end up with questions you try to answer by trying to "go figure."The Bible insists that it is essential to ask God, and "hearken" to His voice, to understand the sorts of questions you raise. That book portrays an epistemologicl problem you and I and everyone faces, similar to that of a judge trying to get to the truth of a matter. There is an "enemy" lying and confusing and distracting and muddying up the waters. You are inclined to think that you are just thinking, but you are actually being subconsiously manipulated mentally by whispering demons getting you to agree to some anti-god agenda.This could be either true or false. The only way to know is to assume it is true, and take necessary precautions. If it is false, you have wasted some time, finding out that it is false. If it is true, your precautions will allow you to know that. But, if it is true and you assume it is false, that's what you mistakenly will conclude.Christians teach that God is "dumb," according to the Bible, because they are actually children of the devil, liars, put on earth to confuse the message of the gospel.Stephen

In Message #16, RaSBeY would have us believe "[that you and I and everyone faces an epistemological problem] similar to that of a judge trying to get to the truth of a matter. There is an 'enemy' lying and confusing and distracting and muddying up the waters. You are inclined to think that you are just thinking, but you are actually being subconsiously manipulated mentally by whispering demons getting you to agree to some anti-god agenda."So now RaSBey provides an analogy wherein anyone who questions the Bible is portrayed as some sort of Demonic Trial Attorney "lying to, confusing, and distracting" the Almighty Inquisitor General (in this analogy the "judge" is clearly Stephen), who as "judge" sits on his High Throne for the sole purpose of determining Truth!Does anyone else see the potential danger in this kind of reasoning? How many folks are there who would scuttle our current secular system that allows for open debate and substitute a neo-medieval Inquisition that condemns cynics, iconoclasts, social activists, etc., as "demonic enemies" who have an "anti-god agenda" facilitated by subliminal mind control? Damn!Do you believe in God and Sen. Dodd, Stephen?[This message has been edited by Abshalom, 01-31-2004][This message has been edited by Abshalom, 01-31-2004]

In fact, there is no Biblical guarantee that YHWH himself is not "an 'enemy' lying and confusing and distracting and muddying up the waters", i.e., the Demiurge.

---

This brings me to the point of this thread, please list any examples that you have of the Bible making God (or Moses or whoever) out to look unreasonably dumb.

---

Here's one of my favourite pages of God being dumb:http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/abs/long.htmFrom:
Skeptic's Annotated Bible / Quran / Book of MormonCheck out also contradictions, false prophecies, science and history from the same page.

Well, you've just pushed the question back one step. Now the problem isn't the existence of evil, it's the existence of Satan.Why does God allow Satan to exist? Either God allows Satan to persist because God is amoral (and therefore not good) or God is unable to stop him (and therefore not all-powerful.)Again, the conclusion is inescapable: An all-powerful, benevolent God does not exist. God is either amoral, powerless, or altogether non-existent. That means it's up to us to bring justice to the world. If somebody shoots you in the chest, you don't have any choices. You're just going to die. Their choice is going to affect you. There's no way around it. Their choice took away all your choices. If God's thing is that he maximises choice, why does he allow that to happen?

If you are assuming God is a being like you and I, then you are correct. If, However, there is a God who created matter(us too) then we can make no assumptions as too his designs. It is impossible to characterize that God as amoral, powerless, or for that matter anything at all... That is why there are no absolutes when debating an unknown...

Why wouldn't I? After all, if we're talking about the Christian God, He says that we've got the same ability to determine right from wrong:

quote:

---

Genesis 3:22
Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil;

---

That's right from God's mouth.Now, if we're talking about some other God, you're right, all bets are off. But apparently that God is content to act in a way that is indistinuishable from no God at all. So who cares? It's not like God's going to do anything. There's no reason to change our behavior or models of the universe to take that God into account.

The same ability to tell right from wrong is not the same as being like a creator of the universe. There are references in the Bible about similarity to God, but there is still a distinct difference between us and the Creator.You here many Christians talking about God's plan. Who knows? Just because we expect God to act one way means nothing. Because we do not understand a willingness for God to let suffering take place does not mean there is no reason.Again, our understanding can not be linked to God's design. If the Christian God exists, then how can anyone pretend to grasp the awesome nature of such a Being? Too often Christians force every word of the bible as absolute truth. If you have a all powerful God, the laws of science do not apply to the many arguments debasing Christianity, because anything is possible. So did the arc really exist, did Adam , Eve and the garden exist? Logical, intellectual thinking says no way. Is it possible there are truths to the stories, absolutely. With a God that created time itself anything is possible.

Duh! Upon reflection, verse indicates animals were made before man. Upon reflection, verse indicates God told man about the tree and then made woman later. Upon reflection verse indicates Eve was decieved, Adam was not decieved but obeyed Eve's offering. Upon reflection, verse indicates what a man sows he shall reap.
IE, Peter says to Revenge of Reason, don't jump off a cliff.
Revenge for Reason jumps off a cliff and is injured, you're not punished by Peter for jumping. Your injured cause you jumped off the cliff, nitwit. Upon reflection, verse indicates God sacrificed his son for the sin of many. Many others are in opposition to this feat and decline His gift.Reflect on that![This message has been edited by P e t e r, 02-01-2004]

Right, but the ability to determine right from wrong is not one of those differences. The Bible literally says that we are just like God in our ability to tell right from wrong. That includes the ability to assess the morality of God's actions. It's right there in the Bible; I showed you. Well, they certainly won't be able to if they follow your advice: "God is too complicated! Don't even try to understand him!"If God is so smart, his actions should be so reasonable anybody can understand them. That's what typifies intelligent plans - they make sense. Anything except making accurate predictions about the universe, which is the point of science. If God can just step in and do anything, at any time, it ceases to be a rational universe. I don't particularly care to live in such a topsy-turvy place, and I don't think we do. That means that either God is rational and predictable, or God doesn't exist.

Maybe you're not old enough to know how this works, but in our world - that is, a moral one - if you have the ability and foreknowledge to prevent somebody from coming to harm, you have a responsibility to do so. Even if the harm is self-caused.If it's Peter's cliff, and he owns it, and knows that RoR is going to jump off, and is standing right there and could stop him, Peter has to do so. It's his moral imperative.An all-powerful, all-knowing God is always in a position where he could prevent harm. That he does not do so either means he's amoral, powerless, or non-existent.[This message has been edited by crashfrog, 02-01-2004]

scottyranks These are from the same post. In one you state that there is a difference between us and God {creator} and in the other you state how can anyone pretend to grasp His nature. So in the former you make a statement about his nature [distinct diference] and the latter you state we cannot do this.Which is it?

---

'Everyone is entitled to his own opinion but not his own facts.'
(Daniel Patrick Moynihan)

Nicely done!

How true, I mean, how many people does Satan kill or demand his followers kill in the Bible....none. YHWH on the other hand can't kill enough, I mean this God has to be the most blood-thirsty monster of all time...according to the Bible anyway.

Take for example the thought process of this:
1) God creates Earth, man, animals, etc.
Peter-"Upon reflection, verse indicates animals were made before man."May want to look again Ace, Gen 2:7 man is created, Gen 2:19 animals are created...hmmm. upon reflection, verse indicates man was created before animals...not that it matters to the point of this argument.2) God tells Adam and Eve to not eat from the tree of knowledge
Peter-"Upon reflection, verse indicates God told man about the tree and then made woman later."Again, (upon reflection) check Gen 2:2-3 it shows that Eve had a clear understanding that God instructed her not to eat from the tree. Seems as if Peter only made it through the first chapter of the Bible! I know it's boring Peter, but stick with it and keep reading...you may actually learn something!3) Duped by Satan they do in fact eat from the tree
Peter-"Upon reflection verse indicates Eve was decieved, Adam was not decieved but obeyed Eve's offering."You don't believe that Adam was decieved, huh? Upon further reflection I'm starting to realize that Peter is not very good at this kind of thing...4) Mankind is punished by God and original sin is introduced
Peter-"Upon reflection, verse indicates what a man sows he shall reap.
IE, Peter says to Revenge of Reason, don't jump off a cliff.
Revenge for Reason jumps off a cliff and is injured, you're not punished by Peter for jumping. Your injured cause you jumped off the cliff, nitwit."Huh?
And nitwit is a bit of a harsh term, don't you think?
In fact, I'll stop right there. Peter has made such a convincing case for himself that I really don't have anything else to add! 'Cept....hahahaha