Man's morality

[I am God]

Where? what was your objective? what would take 15 years to learn? did you accomplish your goal? What happened?

Piedmont College. A small but well staffed Christian College in NE Georgia. My objective was to get a B.A. in Philosophy and Religion with a heavy concentration on Judeo-Christian Religious Traditions. And no, I didn't accomplish my goals because my studies eventually ended my faith. I switched majors about 85% through my course of study. Didn't want to pay another $10K towards something that had already taken enough from me. I later went on to get a Masters in another field. I am currently considering getting my PhD in Psychology. I didn't say I spent 15 years in college, sorry if I gave that impression. I spent 15 years studying the bible. For the first portion of my studies I was in love with Christ. I wanted to know everything about him. I wanted to learn all I could learn about my God. I saw so many people claiming to be followers of Christ yet all they could do was repeat a few lines of scripture. And many had terrible misconceptions that they had heard from somewhere but never bothered to verify. They only read the bible in church. And they certainly didn't seem to practice what they preached. That wasn't going to be good enough for me. I wanted to know everything I could find about my God. I was raised in a Christian home. I was one of those kids that went to vacation bible school, summer church camp, young christian clubs, all that good stuff. It was more serious to me than school, or play, or anything else. Everything else came second. Unfortunately for that young man who was so happy in his delusion... his hunger for knowledge is what eventually pulled him out and woke him up to reality. And I think you'll find that's the key to destroying faith... knowledge. I mean that's what God was trying to deny us from the beginning wasn't it? He offered us blissful ignorance if we only avoid knowledge. Seems there is a poetic truth in that archaic story. But not the one the church would have everyone believe.

God doesn't allow Children to suffer.

Of course he does. Walk into any cancer ward at a children's hospital. Your god could take away their sickness with a snap of his fingers. He has the power... yet he does nothing. That isn't simply a different kind of moral... that's just evil. Did god not provide food for the multitudes? Did Jesus not wield the power of his father to raise Lazarus? The bible seems to paint a picture of a god that can and in fact does step in to aid those who suffer. How many of those sick and dying children in those cancer beds you think are praying to your God? How many of them you think he's gonna let wither and die in terrible pain and suffering? Seems your God deserves a mill stone slung around his neck and to be cast into the sea.

God empowered whole nations with an excess of wealth, with the money, resources, logisitcal ablity to solve all the world's hunger problems, but rather than help, and come off some of the nation's excess, The world's d-bags curse God for not giving everyone the excess they have come a custom to.
All the while He has made it possiable to care for these people If we would only share what we have.

LOL, so man get's the blame for the inequities of God. Such a simple minded reply. Why is it that we seem to keep messing up this perfect being's plans. Seems he's a terrible planner. He's had to reboot his plan for us here THREE times! The Garden didn't work out like he planned. The Garden aftermath didn't work out like he wanted so he brings the flood. And then we still couldn't get our act together so he had to impregnate a child with his son who is himself so that he could allow himself to die as payment for the sin of man. God sounds like a kid trying to build his own tree house. All the while the beings he claims to love so much suffer needlessly (in the face of infinite power and wisdom).

Because Greed has so filled the Hearts of people like you (who would post a picture like this and question God all the while has a month's worth of food in their house) You see you excess as an entitlement, rather than a call to share. To the point where you demand God give everyone the same excess you enjoy. All the while if you and everyone like you were to simply take less and give more, Pictures like this would not exist.

Oooo such venom spewing from you. I must have stepped on a nerve. I'm just going to ignore this post. You know nothing about me that I haven't told you. It's obvious you're simply coming unglued and spraying that good old hatred I've come to expect from followers of Christ when you tug at their security blanket. He'd be ashamed of your example.

How do I know you not a person who "takes less and gives more?" Because you asked the question why does God let babies like this starve. If you spent any time working in situations like this you would have your answer and not need to ask God or me. Even people who work secular benevolence programs knows the answer to this problem.

The answer is us. We have to take care of ourselves because your God isn't doing squat. You're so blind that you blame your god's inaction... on man. Is your God so weak that we are holding him back. Unlimited cosmic power but we little ants are messing up his grand scheme? Do you not see how absurd your ideals are? Are WE the rock so big God cannot move us? By the way... this is another example of the No True Scotsman. You know I am not X because X would never do Y.

Define the 'No true scotsman fallacy'

We both know what it is. I believe it's up to you to demonstrate how it doesn't apply here.

What makes you think I haven't? Because I did not come to your conclusions?

No, because you take the absurd for granted. You defend the flaws and holes in your argument with the assumption that your myth must be held as true before moving forward. This is not the progression of a line of questioning but a clumsy attempt at justifying the ridiculous.

I saw the 'lack of substance' others were trying to make a case for, and I pressed on till i found God.

How tall is he? What's he smell like? What color are his eyes? You claim to have found him... please... tell us what he's like.

I did not look at the bible as proof of the treasure it talks about I look to follow the directions it provided and found what it promised. A map is not 'proof' of treasure. It is the treasure that prooves a map's legitmacy.
The "substance" arguements always focous on the idea that it is possiable to determine whether or not the map will lead to treasure by exaimining the map itself and how/when it was made. This would be a legitmate way to discern a map's viablity if ALL the Variables were known. In short after 2000+ years the variables can never be known, so the only viable way to comfirm the legitmacy of the map is to follow it, not to discuss in a committy whether or not there is enough evidence to support the claim of the viablity concerning the proablity of.. whatever.

I see, so we are fools for expecting the inerrant word of God to be... inerrant? Is this a map made by makeshift topographers or the living breathing word of our creator? You seem to be holding the bible to sort of a simplistic standard. Would God allow his word to return unto him void? This is his message to us... not a grocery list.

Just follow the directions exactly and if you find what you have been promised then the map is good.

I followed the map and found lies, myths, and legends.

I do not fear death or hell.

I'm sure... your delusion promises that you're protected from them. That's its hold on you. It controls you by fear. It's a security blanket for adults.

It is the Atheist who fears accountiablity, and subsequently Hell.

Once again, only in your delusion. There is no such place and accountability to who? Your invented titan? Surely not.

That is why he works so hard to try and 'kill God' with his logic and reason.

Do you not see the irony in this statement? You're basically agreeing that Logic and Reason are forces that work against God. There may be hope for you coming out of your delusion yet.

It's a judgement day defense strageity. a plan 'b' if you will. So you can goto God and claim there was not enough 'proof' therfore you could not be held accountable to your deeds. The Atheist Needs oblivion to avoid Hell.

Now which is it that you believe in? Hell... or the second death. You can't believe in both.

If there is no Heaven and no Hell then where is the need for fear?

Again you're kind of pissing in your own yard with this logic. You're admitting that religion controls you by fear here. Submit or burn. And death is a very natural fear in all living things. Even a bacteria will attempt to avoid death. No longer existing is a bad thing. This is why man invented Gods that would scoop them up into an eternal life and punish those that didn't believe, or sing the right songs, or do the right dances. It's man's ego combined with his fear of death that creates a mythology where he must continue on after this life. And since we know our bodies most certainly die and rot... it must be our magical soul that goes on. It's a fear as old as man himself. Before man invented your God... there were others.

My faith is based in love

No it isn't. You cannot separate Jesus from the tyrant Yahweh. They are one in the same. And Yahweh condones slavery, murder, rape, what we would consider pedophilia, and kidnapping. Just because he showed up in the flesh and was all lovey dovey doesn't excuse his rampage the 1,300 or so years prior.

I have seen the gates of Hell and do not fear them more than I long to be welcomed into the Love God offers us.

Really? Where are they? What did they look like? Can you show them to me? Are you claiming to have had visions? Do we need to call a mental health professional?

Then why does one contradict the other?

Because they creators see man as sick and twisted. God must be above that. He must be more pure and good than we are. And even our best moral ideals must pale in comparison to his.

So this is your Collage level stuff huh? You do know Paul and James are talking about two different types of death correct? If so then what does the worship of Paul over James have to do with the context of these two seperate passages?

We aren't talking about which type of death. We are talking about whether man wins God acknowledges works or just faith.

"But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only."

Actually it doesn't. Man's morlity as I have said 6 dozen times already is based on works deeds and God's is not. There are two completely different ways of determining value here, you keep trying to combine them into one.

Because they are. You're just cherry picking your beliefs.

But, if our defination of 'moral is always changing, and God does not change then how can He possiably be 'moral'? Are you so blind to see that you are describing the Ultimate example of shift the goal posts?
Even by the standards of man's own logic you line of thought is falicious.

God's standard doesn't change because the bible is not open to edit. It's the bible's greatest weakness. It remains stagnant and therefore archaic. As man evolves and moves past our savage past (slowly but surely) we begin to see the Yahweh character for the joke he is. But look closely when the bible WAS open to edit. We move from a blood thirsty fire and brimstone titan like Yahweh to a peace loving hippy like Yeshua. And yet the Christian sees no disparity. It's one of the greatest hypocrisies of all time. Understand that your bible was (New Testament) was selected for you by the very people that nailed Yeshua to the cross. There were dozens if not hundreds of Gospels written about Jesus... and the Romans selected the four you call the foundation of your faith for you. Think about that for a second. Think of all the writings that you'll never know about that were burned or smashed. And the story you accept as god's word was picked for you by the Romans. And you claim it contains truth? Please...

But, He didn't He protected Job (per the 'hedge' satan described that God put around his whole life.) All except the time satan was allowed to challenge job's faith.

LMAO... I see, so God was still lookin after Job... even though he turned the most power being outside of the trinity loose on him. And all to settle a wager. Do you not see how flawed God is in the passage. Satan punked God in Job. He goaded him and God went for it. And in the end... Satan was right. Job turned on God to the point that he had to come down and bully Job back into fearing him. Satan made a fool of God in Job.

BTW... did you know that Satan means "Truth" in Sanskrit? A language that predates the Hebrew culture.

And, even then there were limits God placed on Satan. When the challenge was over and Job proved Himself faithful He was given 10x's what he lost.

First Job only submitted when God shook his fist at him... not because of how wonderful and good he was. It's not faith... it's the ant submitting to the kid with the magnifying glass.

Second... I'm sure the restoration meant a great deal to the loved ones God allowed to be murdered just to prove Satan was right.

Third, if you admit that God can protect people... what about the child in the picture? Why does God ignore him?

In all of your collegic level of study have you even read the book of Job? If you had you know the 'indifference Came from satan and not God. God parshially 'lowered the shield' around Job and satan attacked to the limits of what he was allowed. If God was indifferent then why was their a 'shield' before durning and after the trial of job?

If he wasn't indifferent... why'd he let it down knowing the horrors Satan was going to deliver upon him? Let's break this down to our level. I have a puppy that I love and care for. The puppy loves me. You say... "That puppy wouldn't love you anymore if you bring him outside and let me kick him in the head a few times." And then to see if you're right... I let my beloved little puppy outside to be submitted to your ruthlessness. What kind of master am I? Pretty bad one. Sure... it's my puppy and I can do what I like with it. But that still makes me an inhuman piece of shit doesn't it? That's what God show's himself to be in Job. He is the one that allows the brutalization of Job and the murder of his family.

In-fracking-deed.

So God is no better than a 12 year old bully?

Yes, Might makes right.

Really? So if a man comes in your home and kills you and rapes your wife and kills your kids... He's right? Just simply because he's stronger? Interesting if not misguided view of what is right.

If this were true then why doesn't God's 'morality' match or even exceed our own? Why is it shown to be completely different than anything man has ever known? Why was it written this way if it is contary to what we understand?

I explained this earlier.

But again God would not be God if He is somehow thought to be 'less' than us. Doesn't the 'morality' of God make Him less than us? if so how can He still be God

Simple... he isn't. He's just a character created by bronze age savages.

It would seem to me that atheist believe the God is supposted repersent their morality times 10. This was what was taught in the darkages church for quite sometime (1500+ years). So again my question is if this is what we think God is supposed to be, then why is it the oppsite (in most cases) of what the bible teaches?

Already explained.

If it is as you say and we have created God to reflect the best of the best of man.. To be a 'super-man.' Then why does He fall short when we compare Him to our goal post of morality?

I didn't say that he's supposed to be the best of man. He is supposed to be morally perfect and righteous. But his actions show him not to be. What would you say of a being that allowed a monster to murder someone's family? What would your view of that act be given that you have a Christian ethic. What if I had a killer on a leash and he dared me to let him have his way with your family and I let him. What kind of being would that make me by your Christian ethic?

But that's just it sport, all the stuff you brought up in Job proves He is not your understanding of perfect. (even if you got it all wrong.)

LMAO... c'mon now... don't start down that ridiculous "His ways aren't our ways" intellectually dishonest christian cop out nonsense. God does evil things and you guys say "You just don't understand his plan" or "Mysterious ways" or some other ethereal unseen level nonsense. Don't be childish. There's a reason no one can find Santa at the north pole. And it isn't because he has some kind of magic invisible palace that we somehow don't understand.

EXACTLY!!!, So why is the God of the bible 'flawed' by your understanding of morality if He were indeed created by man?

Because he was invented by savages who's value system is archaic... what about this aren't you getting? Yahweh was perfect for the Israelites of 500 BCE. He crushed their enemies, gave them the right to rape and pillage whoever they wanted, and justified their wants and desires so long as they made a burnt offering to him. He was a Barbarian Tribe War God and was perfect in every way FOR THEM. He seems odd and mysterious to us because we don't share their values. But it's just because he's outdated. Their view of God began to change as well after the Babylonians kicked the shit out of them and destroyed their temple.

You are missing a HUGE piece of the puzzle. (which means your 15 years of bible study was probably a waist of time)

Says who? You? I don't take that real seriously.

Again, I point back to the church of the dark ages. They are the ones who set into motion the idea of maintaining a set 'moral standard.' (the same basic principle we live by today) Not content but a works based form of righteousness. These guys had complete control of the bible. They even translated it into a dead language so as to keep it out of the hands of the common man. this allowed them to make all sorts of changes and completely control all aspects of this religion without anyone having the ablity to question their authority.

What does this have to do with the price of tea in China?

My question to you is, why wasn't the bible changed then to reflect this works based morality they pushed hard for 1500 years? Why wasn't the picture of God changed to reflect the image of man/super-man/god thing you described?

The bible isn't open to edit. Sure there are off shoots and other religions. The mormons believe Joseph Smith was inspired to write his nonsense. But the original Greek and Hebrew texts are what I'm talking about.

They had complete control over all the manuscripts of the bible, and over all the traditions of the church in that time. So Why didn't the written word in 1500 years make the changes the church at that time did?

what perserved the bible as it was written?

I'm not sure I understand your question. We have ancient texts that have survived that show us much of what is contained in the bible. And some of it has been lost. Some of it is guess work. And a good deal of it has been mistranslated. But it's core isn't open to edit. To do so would be heresy. Something that could get you killed up until a few hundred years ago.

Again if things happen like you said, all anyone need do was lose an orginal book and replace it with one that made the changes needed to support their church doctrine. In that time they had no problems comming up with stuff like that. Pieces of the orginal cross, the shroud Christ was buried in, the spear He was periced with, the nails they used. All the church need do is have the pope bless this new thing and it was law.
So why wasn't God changed if God was man made then? Why did God stand in stark contrast to the doings of the church in that period?

Much of those things probably were manufactured. As far as why no changes during the dark ages... there was no need... the church had ultimate power... why mess up a good thing? Plus the people truly believed it. It wasn't like the knew it a was BS and so were just using it as a gimmick. Like you... the truly believed it and felt they were serving God.