Earlier you stated that you did not create this or that and that is correct. It seems you are starting to figure this out for yourself without my assistance. Having created things (if we are allowed to assume that)you move from one part of the argument to another without warning. He has a right to dispense justice in a way that we do not.
That is assuming that a deity which you subscribe to exists. It's amazing how many ambassadors there are for God, and yet all of them have different characteristics and speak for God as if their version is absolute truth. That leaves people on the fence, such as myself, left to wonder which god is the god of gods.
Is the Westboro Baptists god your God too? Know what I mean? And it doesn't even have to be that extreme. All denominations have different views on what God is, how he things, what is truth, etc, etc. One church says God loves homosexuals and another says they're destined for hell. So are they worshiping the same God or a false god?
What is in you, is the point at hand my simple friend.
Organs, blood, bones... Again, I don't know what physical, metaphysical, mystical or magical thing you are alluding to when you are asking "what is in side of me." I thought that I was clear when I said I don't understand what you are looking for me to say. Why don't you just come out and say what it is? That would probably do a lot to push the debate along.
You seem to know that God is evil and an abomination
I never said or implied that. What I said was that there are contradictions in the bible that leaves the readers left to wonder which attributes God
really has.
you cannot figure out why it is ok to eradicate a colony of ants and you will not provide me with the moral principle that allows such actions.
That's because there is no moral principle at all. If it doesn't exist, why do you insist that I make one up?
When speaking about God your very clear about what is in you, how did you make this moral determination so clearly, if your not sure what is inside of you?
My mind, which is shaped by life experience.
Even demonstrating that lying is always wrong is not in conflict with what I said about Gods justice and mercy. God does not have to approve of a persons actions in one situation to bless thier overall life if it is basically a good one.
And here we see you shifting goalposts by ever so slowly leaning towards relativism. What is "basically good?" That's basically meaningless, especially when David says, "There are none that are good, no, not even one." Jesus even quoted him on it.
Yes, God always punishes sin, but he does nto have to it in a manner prescibed by you. Before the time of Christ the gentiles (Rahab) went by the law of the heart Romans 2:14-16. After that he punished sin or forgave it through Christ. Before or after christ he has always been overlooking sin, until all was fullfilled in Christ. One must still repent of sin to be forgiven. My guess is that rahab did
I'm sorry but Rahab was long before the time of Christ. You clearly stated that lying is always wrong and is always punished. The greater problem here is that you are wrong because you're being stubborn about God's absolute law, which even in Jeremiah he said "behold, I am doing a new thing in new," possibly referencing Christ. Regardless, it's in no way absolute, biblically speaking. And that is the subject material we've been going over.
Your son or daughter back talks you presently, you do not approve of the action immediately and address it. Do you stop treating them in a loving fashion over all, ofcourse not. Why do you wish to turn God into a machine.
I didn't turn God in to a machine, YOU did! By saying that God's law is absolute, you nullify any chance of redemption, contingencies, or any kind of special circumstances (story of Rahab and 2 Kings, etc). By subscribing to moral absolutes, you inadvertently subscribe to what Paul would describe in his day as a Judaizer, someone who looks at the letter of the law without considering the spirit of the law.
Question? Can God have a hard fast rule that something is wrong or a sin and not forgive or overlook it? my goodness man that is the basic theme of the scriptures.
Oh, now you're starting to get it! Except, sadly, you're not getting it. I just led you in to your own contradiction. You sat here and told me in no uncertain terms that God's law is absolute, and that he punishes conditionally, yet forgives unconditionally. That's not an absolute. That would be relative to the circumstances, which is what I've been trying to get you to understand.
But you fellas key in on one aspect and beat into the ground to make God into a overall monster.
Who exactly are "you fella's" and who exactly is making God a monster? You know nothing about me or my beliefs or what I've gone through or what I've tried to do for God. You assume that I'm an atheist, which I'm not. Far from it, actually. I'm known to excoriate many an atheist on this forum.
For the present time, I'm only questioning who gets to speak on God's behalf and whether or not God is the author of the bible. If using the mind that God gave me to question logically is a sin, then I hope to be the world's most prolific sinner.
It smacks of arrogance and presumption for people to tell me all about God, as if God granted them exclusive access.
I have now answered this several times and reinforced it with illustration both from scripture and life. You would do well to respond to them without all the attacks. "Whether or not God does any of that", is not an answer and it is the VERY POINT my simple friend. Please pay attention, you cant departmentalize God.
That's funny, because that's exactly what you're doing and that is exactly what I'm not doing. You are the one telling me the way God is, not me. Is that not true?
All I'm doing is comparing verses from the bible, all of which claim to speak on behalf of God, and they conflict. Please don't chastise me and tell me all about God, and then claim that I'm the one compartmentalizing God. That's just ridiculous from start to finish.
Im not making stuff up that is not already in the book. Dont get mad HG, just respond logically.
I have been responding with consistent logic. You stated that God is absolute and you to claim to know what he is absolute on. I've now shown you two different stories proving how, scripturally, they contradict one another. That's using logic. How would that somehow make me illogical?
Your becoming irrational HG, swearing, making personal attacks and flip floping from one argument to another.
I'm not attacking you personally, I'm attacking your position and your rationale. Attacking you would be calling you names. I haven't done that. But now that we're on the subject I am curious, does you calling me "simple" and using the term "atheist" derisively qualify as you resorting to ad hominem towards me?
At present we are discussing the nature of God and his attributes, not wehther the scriptures are reliable.
Surely you can see why that's absurd. If the scriptures aren't reliable, then by what other means could you know the specific nature of God and what he is alleged to have done for mankind throughout the centuries? It therefore is an important and valid question.
Calm down and take one topic at a time.
I am calm and I'm not moving from one topic to the next. I'm using different illustrations which point to the same central message, which is, your initial statements are unfounded.
I think maybe that you're just upset that this debate isn't going as you planned.
You know full well this is a misrepresentation of what I have said here. You drew immediate conclusions from my statment that lying is wrong in any and all situations.
With absolutes there is no leeway. You consigned yourself to a slow and painful philosophical demise. That's not misrepresentation, that's exposing the flaws.
Christ'S sacrafice covered even Rahabs sin of lying. However, some of the same people of her time would not repent and had become so evil with no signs of repentace that God took greater measures to deal with thier sins.
Are you assuming that or can you point to anything specific showing what you are alleging?
"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." - Samual Adams
™ Version 4.2
