(April 24, 2017 at 1:29 pm)Grandizer Wrote:(April 24, 2017 at 11:29 am)SteveII Wrote: Why isn't Justice part of the classical definition of God? It is the crux of the entire message of redemption (which is what the entire Bible leads up to). No assuming going on: Bible verses about Justice.
The Bible God is an add-on of the philosophical classical theist God. The classical theist God, in its pure form, is not necessarily just. You need a collection of ancient books written by human beings to give you that attribute for your add-on God. [1]
The problem for you is that I, and other atheists, have no reason to accept that God, if he exists, must be just (and particularly in the way you conceive of "just"). [2]
Quote:They key I think in understanding this issue is that God is perfectly Holy--not able to tolerate sin in the least.
How would you really know that though? What if, instead, the universalist God represents the true God? Perhaps "holy" and "sin" are silly concepts to the true God that he finds it laughable that many people think these matter to him. [3]
And the "not tolerate" part doesn't sound godly to me, even if towards sin. I'd be far more impressed by a God that doesn't so easily triggered by the things we limited beings do. [4]
1. I don't even know what you are saying. I have been very clearly talking about the God of CHristianity. Talk about goal post moving!
2. So? I don't care what you accept. I was describing a doctrine that I was asked about.
3. Because I believe the cumulative case for the Christian God is more complete than any other and that is ALL I have been describing and discussing.
4. Good think it is not God's objective to impress you.
