Is Christ cruel? (For member Schrafinator)

Hi Brian,
Thanks for the reply, you raised some good points. Let's see. First of all you objected to the analogy. Fair enough, the analogy isn't perfect. The number is irrelevant. As long as there were x members in the club, and x members broke the rules, and x members were kicked out. In fact, even that doesn't have to be the case really, but we'll leave that, since its not important.To compare. If Adam and Eve had Cain and Abel whilst still in the Garden of Eden, then Eve ate the apple, gave it to Adam, who gave it to Cain who gave it to Abel....would that change the Fall significantly? Adam and Eve were briefed on the rules, and the penalty for those rules. They knew what was right "And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat" and they knew what was wrong "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it" (Genesis 2:15-16)In the analogy we could say "The Lord Manager commanded the punters saying, Of every table in the premises thou mayest freely place thy drink: But of the pool table, thou shalt not place thy beverages." Quite right, so let's extend the analogy to slightly unrealistic levels. Our punters HAVE to go out to a night club once darkness falls. There are only two, maybe three (depending on your theology) different night clubs in town. We know about Club Paradise, but there is also Club Hell, and Club Purgatory might an option too. If you aren't going to play by the rules of Club Paradise, you only have two options. Now, if the the Club Paradise manager, sent his son onto the streets, to live and die the rules of Club Paradise as an example to the punters...the Club Paradise manager would clearly hold the punters in high regard, and would really want their custom. I actually brought this up back in Message 25:

quote:

---

The true argument is that God created Adam and Eve - should He have known that they were fallible and able to be so easily tempted by the Serpent?

---

So yes, you've got the core of the debate, its not that Christ is cruel for not saving Schraf, its that is God cruel for damning Adam and Eve?You bring this up again later, so I'll talk more about it then (I've interrupted your sentence)... He didn't create sin and death. I alluded to this earlier:

quote:

---

Sin and death is disobedience to God, in the same way that cold is the absense of heat.

---

Sin is the denial of God dominion, death is the absense of life. God breathed life into us, if we deny his dominion, then we see the logical conclusion of that - our life is our own, no miraculous infinite lives for us anymore (unless we accept Christ, then everlasting life is restored) What is his punishment? The absense of his Grace and the possibility of reconciliation? Its like saying that the punishment for turning the heating off is getting cold and how that is over the top. We turn from God, the result of sin is the natural result. No, its like being born in a prison, and the jailor saying to you. Here are society's rules: Do not murder people. Do you agree to accept these rules? If yes, you are released from prison. Just to reiterate, they knew what the rules where, and what the punishment would be. They did not know good and evil. How do you know what path was open? Maybe the only way to remain theologically consistent was to send His son to die for our sins. Perhaps there was another way, but I don't know what that would be...maybe the suffering that Jesus went through was symbolic. A way of inspiring people what Jesus went through for us, demonstrating exactly how much He loved us. If he just died, knowing he had eternal life ahead, what kind of sacrifice was that? I actually dealt with this earlier as well in Message 162,

quote:

---

God gave man Free Will, and presented man with the opportunity to defy his word by giving him breakable terms and conditions. He made it clear that punishment for breaking those terms and disobeying God would be harsh.

---

But to expand slightly, we do not know that God KNEW that Adam and Eve would fall. There is Biblical support to suggest that just because God can know everything, He might not choose to exercise that. See Job, God did not know if Job would forsake God if His blessing were removed. God did not know where Adam was after he ate the apple: Genesis 3: "And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where [art] thou?" and God did not know why Adam was ashamed of his nakedness "And he said, Who told thee that thou [wast] naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? "Perhaps God has chosen to not have total knowledge in some areas?Now, lets assume the opposite, maybe God does foresee all things. Perhaps he has created us all so that as many as is possible to be saved, will be saved? If he loaded the dice so that everyone was guaranteed to be saved, the whole exercise would be pointless wouldn't it? Why not allow us to hear both sides of the story, the Serpent's and the Lord's and allow us to decide which is true. Would it be unreasonable for the club manager/Head Masonor to say "Somebody broke the rules once, so now you have sign this disclaimer promising you won't break the rules, and that you accept that the Manager's word is final"? If you do not want to live in comfort, what choice do you have? There really is no alternative but to live in discomfort. Don't want to live in the Grace of the Lord? Well, living out of the Lord's Grace is Hell...your choice. Or perhaps God is saying "Choose to live in my grace, or live out of my grace forever". Where 'living out God's grace is synonymous with Hell, because living out of God's grace is torturous. God didn't choose that, its just the way it is. Living without any joy or hope is not a good thing. So if God had required that no faith was required to believe in Him, things wouldn't be so bad? I think faith is a central tenet of Christianity, I think its a necessary virtue. If you don't have that virtue, you should stop listening to the adversary's lies, and listen to the Lord God.It was mankind's lack of faith in God's word that got us in this mess. Perhaps God wants us demonstrate that we can have faith in His word again? Erm, no, He's right there, offering salvation for those that seek it. No problem, I have actually learned quite a lot from all of this. Strangely I have a new found new respect for Christianity. Personally, I don't think its faith that's needed, but a suspension of disbelief. The one thing I can't get my head around is that blasted Trinity. So He sent his Son, who was Himself, down to the World, to die for us (even though He cannot die), his last word's were to himself, asking why he had forsaken himself, and then went up to heaven to sit at his own right hand. And that doesn't touch the third part of the trinity.Maybe one day I'll get it.Anyway, thanks for your time. It's good to think!

---

Eternity is in love with the productions of time.
The busy bee has no time for sorrow.
The hours of folly are measur'd by the clock; but of wisdom, no clock can measure.

Good show! But when your brain has recovered a bit I'd like to ask which Christianity? Last year there was a woman here (I can't remember her name) who was a bibical literalist protestant who didn't believe in the Trinity either and made a good case for what is called Arianism.Suspension of disbelief is that like giving up common sense? There was no Garden of Eden, no Tree of Knowledge, etc. I've no idea how modern people can believe such things existed. To live in the real world and live in this ancient myth world as if it is this world and call this pretending metaphysical or spiritual and then feel superior for having done this is something that leaves me gaping lfen

Hi Modulous,Analogies are useful for explaining the unfamiliar by drawing parallels with the familiar, but this isn't a case of people being unfamiliar with Christian concepts. No analogy is perfect, so I won't critisize the analogy itself except to agree with Brian that it is poorly formulated. It doesn't really capture the important elements of Christianity that are being examined by this thread. Perhaps if the customers were the children of the club owner, and perhaps if the club owner had the power to create whatever clubs he wanted, then it would be a more accurate analogy, but for me it misses the mark.No matter how much you explain what God did and why he did it, he still murdered or had murdered people for no cause, and he still condemns millions to hell every year for nothing more than not worshipping him. No amount of words could ever obfuscate the cruelty of the Christian God. Much of it is recorded in the Bible, anyway, so he's unable to hide from his record. All your explanations boil down to, "Well, he warned you."Gee, I can just feel the love!--Percy

Do you mean which denomination? The answer is no preference. I just found some passages in the Holy Bible that I had never understood before suddenly making more sense. This means that my Christian teachers were right where I was wrong. Its a bit like a "aha!" moment when one expands ones understanding of a subject. "Aaahh, it all seems to make sense now" kind of feeling. Of course, it doesn't all make sense, but you know what I mean.For the record, as a child I lived in the Bahamas and went to a Gospel school. I returned to England and was CofE for the remainder of my Christian career. Interesting, I had a quick scan on the ideas of Arianism, and it looks to be something which merits more investigation. Thanks. Hehe - I suppose suspension of disbelief is a little like giving up common sense, but not totally. Its more like allowing oneself to stop disbelieving something for some purpose. Suspending disbelief allows us to enjoy ghost stories and horror novels, so it isn't all bad. I just don't want to live my life in a permanent state of suspended disbelief.I am not sure how people accept the literal Eden story. I think it might take repeated indoctrination whether that indoctrination is self imposed or not is not important. But that might be an insulting or biased outlook, so its probably best not to start ranting about it here.

Hi again Percy, sorry for not directly responding to you earlier, but Brian's post required more time, and time is limited.I think I might (finally) understand the problem here when you said: Perhaps having the children being involved would make a difference, but I don't think it does. The fact is that someone, in the past has broken the rules where they were trusted to not break the rules. Therefore we cannot trust people to not break the rules, therefore they must show that we can trust them to not break the rules. The analogy is weak in that spilling beer on the pool table is not a massive infraction, and we can eject people after the fact, and get the to pay for the damages. Whereas eating the fruit of knowledge of good and evil is a fundamental infraction with huge ramifications for mankind. As it says - they become as God (Genesis 3:22)"And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:"The analogy wasn't meant to encompass all things, and run as a direct parallel (which would be impossible). It was just meant as a little illustration that being kicked out of somewhere (mankind out of eden) was unpleasant, but being allowed back in is merciful of those that run the join (God). Trying to extend any analogy beyond what it was designed to illustrate is problematic.Eating the apple, led to Adam/Eve's knowledge of good and evil being inherited. Beer spillage isn't an inherited trait. Let's totally expand the analogy again. Let's say there is a top secret file left lying around. It discusses all the business deals of the club, and all the possible shady business deals that are possible. The manager says "don't read that". And you read it anyway, you get kicked out. The Book turns out to sci-fi hypertech and has changed your DNA so that you are no inherently aware of how to con the establishment (knowledge of evil), and all your kids will inherit that trait. So if the manager could create a club that was neither Club Hell or Club Paradise you mean? Somewhere else to go that would be neither? If being out of the Grace of God is Hell, surely any club that is not Club Paradise would be exactly the same as Club Hell? That is to say can God create Paradise, and a not-Paradise, and then create a third thing which is something else?This message has been edited by Modulous, Sun, 05-June-2005 12:04 AM

No, I simply know that God is right whatever he does, I don't judge anybody's heart. To decide God is wrong would be judging HIS heart, the heart that died to save me. Some here have no problem with that harsh judgment of God's heart of course.

I suppose you worded your response to be as unanswerable as possible, but I have to admit it doesn't make much sense to me. Any punishment for CRIME is by definition not MURDER, it's JUSTICE.It's "uncruel" because it's just, because it's God's own judgment. Best I can do to answer and yes, I'll get to your Rules 1 and 2 in a minute. They received the death penalty for their crime, they were not murdered. By today's corrupted ideas of justice I suppose it's a minor offense to lie, even to God. Actually my answer again is that I don't judge God. His justice, as I said in the post you are answering here too, is recorded to TEACH us about HIS judgments, to warn us about what HE considers major and minor. You and others presume to judge Him instead of learning from Him. I don't recall Brian's example, but in such a case, again, God is teaching us what malefactors are facing at The Last Judgment, where He isn't going to be too interested in YOUR idea of what's just, having taken pains to warn you at length about His own standards and give you a way out. My beliefs are indeed axioms because they are God's own teachings, nothing of my own making. His laws are to be learned from as the standards by which we are all judged, but again you dare to judge Him and His laws instead.I'd put it this way: Rule 1: THE God cannot do wrong.Rule 2: The idea that THE God in His judgments behaves cruelly, as expressed in the bleeding heart posts here, is simply the expression of self-righteous blind corrupted fallen humanity. Time and again in scripture when God punishes or threatens to punish people in a drastic way, His closest friends (Abraham, Moses, various prophets) step in to plead with Him for mercy and God often honors their request, and even Himself objects in periods where there is no one to plead the case for His errant people. Seems pretty merciful to me, a God who WANTS to save, but will not override His perfect Justice. As Jesus said, the Law WILL be fulfilled, every dot and comma of it. It will be fulfilled either in the punishment of the offender, or in the mercy of the cross. It's your choice. He's THE God. Interesting how not only God Himself but all His followers are always slandered simultaneously. I'm honored.

So you have no morality of your own? If God apparated himself into your living room and commanded you to kill your neighbour you'd do it gladly?

---

*not an actual doctor

You're scaring me. Be very careful with this. You do realize that there are people who do just that when the apparation tells them to?lfen

Yes they're to put it in layman's terms, which frankly are all that I know crazy people.

---

*not an actual doctor

It helps to know something about who God is. He hasn't kept you in the dark about that, but speaking of who's crazy, obviously you choose to remain there in the dark with your crazy idea about God appearing in someone's living room, or commanding something that goes against His character.

so your response is to dodge the question. The question isn't Would God do this? but what would you do if he did this?edited to add: How does this go against his character? he's commanded the death/murders/just killing of others before.This message has been edited by DrJones*, 06-04-2005 08:41 PM

---

*not an actual doctor

Circular reasoning. Whether or not God is right no matter what he does is the question under discussion. You can hardly support the affirmative position with a proof that starts by assuming that to be the case.

If you don't belive in Allah there's a pretty nasty hell waiting for you where your skin gets replaced to burn again, And Allah knows best."There is no God but Allah and Muhammud is his Phophet" are two very specific belief claims made by the Qu'ran. Muslims go you Christians one better as they make these beliefs publicly five times a day.

Fact remains, there is no belief in anything that happened to Mohammed or concerning Mohammed that is an article of belief, such as his turning water into wine, or healing the sick or raising the dead or the like. The belief you are talking about is the kind of belief in an abstraction, which is what I was contrasting with the belief in Jesus that we are called to.Jesus PROVED by his life and his actions that He is God -- this is what we are asked to believe, what He said and did.Mohammed just TELLS you Allah is God and Mohammed is his prophet and didn't do a thing to prove any of it.