[quote='Thor' pid='308804' dateline='1342013326']
[quote]So when this deity is drowning babies, turning people into pillars of salt, killing firstborn sons or telling us that we can keep slaves, this is all "Good"?[/quote]Absolutly, 100% Yes. Again the 'deeds' them selves hold no intrensic value. It is the will of God the makes a deed 'good or bad.' That is why it is said we can not work our way to heaven with our 'good' deeds. Because there are no good deeds before God, apart from His Expressed Will. And that expressed will demands that we must first seek attonement, before any deeds are deemed 'good.'
[quote]Unless you can demonstrate your god exists, then right and wrong are standards that exist without "God".[/quote]
why do you guys continually pull this broken trump card? Again if you are have a discussion concerning the nature of God, then you accept that he exists for the duration of the conversation. Otherwise what is the point in asking the question to begin with?
[quote]By this standard, if this deity told you to kill your children, wouldn't refusing to do so be "wrong"?[/quote]The story of aberham confrims that it would be wrong to refuse God in this circumstance. So Yes.
[quote]And how the hell are we supposed to know what is in the "expressed will" of this deity?[/quote]"Expressed" as in written.. Or Recorded in the Bible.
[quote] By referencing a confusing, unclear, contradictory mish mash of a book? Because believers can't even agree among themselves what is and isn't moral.[/quote]Because 'morality' is ever changing with the culture you live in. If 'we' Speak of God's righteousness, and remain silent where the bible is silent, then all bible based believers are united in their responses. Because the Expressed will of God is very clear.
[quote]Is stem cell research right or wrong?[/quote]Where do you get the stem cells? It is a sin to kill children for them.
[quote]What about using birth control?[/quote]Birth Control was used then, and there is no command against it. (Speak where the bible Speaks and remain silent where the bible is silent.)
[quote] How about polygamy?[/quote]
Polygamy was encouraged for a time, but by the time Christ taught it was very rare, and discouraged within the confines of the NT church. (In that no man could take a leadership role unless he was married to one woman.) however that does not mean one could not worship God or be apart of the church if he had more than one wife.
[quote] Premarital sex? [/quote]Sex outside of the bounds of a santified marriage is always a sin.
[quote]Gambling?[/quote]The act itself is not a sin, but the love of money is. Most christians who say gambling is a sin blur the lines between the gaming aspect and the resaon one must have to want to gamble to begin with.
If some believe it to be a sin then for them it is a sin. That means even if it is not a sin for me I am not allowed my freedom in gambling cause my brother to stumble. For his sake I will not gamble in front of him or encourage him to do so.
[quote] Some believers will say yes, some will say no. In which case, why should we pay any attention to you at all?[/quote]
If some say yes and some say no, and both are right, doesn't that point to a freedom beyond the confines of a soceitial based 'morality?'
[quote]So when this deity is drowning babies, turning people into pillars of salt, killing firstborn sons or telling us that we can keep slaves, this is all "Good"?[/quote]Absolutly, 100% Yes. Again the 'deeds' them selves hold no intrensic value. It is the will of God the makes a deed 'good or bad.' That is why it is said we can not work our way to heaven with our 'good' deeds. Because there are no good deeds before God, apart from His Expressed Will. And that expressed will demands that we must first seek attonement, before any deeds are deemed 'good.'
[quote]Unless you can demonstrate your god exists, then right and wrong are standards that exist without "God".[/quote]

[quote]By this standard, if this deity told you to kill your children, wouldn't refusing to do so be "wrong"?[/quote]The story of aberham confrims that it would be wrong to refuse God in this circumstance. So Yes.
[quote]And how the hell are we supposed to know what is in the "expressed will" of this deity?[/quote]"Expressed" as in written.. Or Recorded in the Bible.
[quote] By referencing a confusing, unclear, contradictory mish mash of a book? Because believers can't even agree among themselves what is and isn't moral.[/quote]Because 'morality' is ever changing with the culture you live in. If 'we' Speak of God's righteousness, and remain silent where the bible is silent, then all bible based believers are united in their responses. Because the Expressed will of God is very clear.
[quote]Is stem cell research right or wrong?[/quote]Where do you get the stem cells? It is a sin to kill children for them.
[quote]What about using birth control?[/quote]Birth Control was used then, and there is no command against it. (Speak where the bible Speaks and remain silent where the bible is silent.)
[quote] How about polygamy?[/quote]
Polygamy was encouraged for a time, but by the time Christ taught it was very rare, and discouraged within the confines of the NT church. (In that no man could take a leadership role unless he was married to one woman.) however that does not mean one could not worship God or be apart of the church if he had more than one wife.
[quote] Premarital sex? [/quote]Sex outside of the bounds of a santified marriage is always a sin.
[quote]Gambling?[/quote]The act itself is not a sin, but the love of money is. Most christians who say gambling is a sin blur the lines between the gaming aspect and the resaon one must have to want to gamble to begin with.
If some believe it to be a sin then for them it is a sin. That means even if it is not a sin for me I am not allowed my freedom in gambling cause my brother to stumble. For his sake I will not gamble in front of him or encourage him to do so.
[quote] Some believers will say yes, some will say no. In which case, why should we pay any attention to you at all?[/quote]
If some say yes and some say no, and both are right, doesn't that point to a freedom beyond the confines of a soceitial based 'morality?'