General questions about the Christian idea of God and love

[Drich]

Let's try this again!

Since you are willing to quote any part of the bible as justification for your beliefs, I'd assume the whole bible qualifies as "the doctrine of Christ".

No the doctrine of Christ is limited to the first four books of the NT. That said the whole bible is indeed used to describe the nature of God.

1. A lot of mainstream Christians don't follow the bible completely.

That is between them and God.

They pick and choose which parts apply. They also accept the works of other Christian theologians and philosophers (such as adding in the concept of omni-benevolence according to you). But you have no problem calling them Christians who are "seeking god in their own way".

We are all allowed to seek God our own way, however this does not mean God is bound to honor our efforts. That said if we seek God as our lined in scripture He will not only support us He will reward the faithful.

2. Mormons do believe in the bible and like mainstream Christians, they add other stuff to it and pick and choose what to believe. But they are not Christians.

3. Jehovah's Witnesses believe in the bible too, but they pick and choose as well and add their beliefs. But they are not Christians.

4. The same goes for Branch Davidians who are also not Christians.

I'm not seeing any consistency here.

Because their is a common element you are missing in the three cults you have mentioned. The bible is not the only source in which those cults derive their beliefs and doctrine.

The mormons have the book of mormon, the JW's have an endless stream of 'watch tower' augmentation/supliments to the bible (which is taken as the infalliable word of God) the branch davidians believe david koresh was the second comming of Jesus.. that had sex with all their wives and took a dozen or so 12 year old brides.

Once you stray from the bible add or cut out what you do not like you cease building your 'house' on the rock of Christ. Which means you cease being a 'Christian' by defination.

Mainstream Christians (for the most part) do not do this. That is where the consistancy is you fail to see.

Biblically based answers don't automatically resolve the logical issues of your god.

They do if you understand context and what was orginally written.

And all the different understanding may be correct?

No, they are ALL Wrong to one degree or another.

That is why your god is illogical. In reality, when people understand things in a conflicting and contradictory manner, then all views cannot be correct. But apparently, where your god is concerned, anything goes.

I know you do not see the irony here as I do, but to a degree you are right in that because you can not resolve these 'logical' errors you loose faith. The problem is, you from a point of pride assume that your understanding of God is indeed correct.

For instance in your last paragraph you assumed that 'all are right in their view of God.' No questions just an assertion and a blanket statement. The a follow up assertion that supports your current beliefs.

When in fact all Christians no matter what their faith is, are wrong in their view of God in one degree or another. And, it is the same grace that we receive when we willfully sin, that helps us find forgiveness when we are worshiping and trying to love God with all of our being. (As the greatest command tells us)

We are finite God is infinate, so therefore none of us can have a complete understanding of God.

..and we are not expected to either.

And that does not include people who don't worship him?

It does not include those covered by the attonement offered by Christ no.
(But as mat 7 tells us not all who say they are Christians/followers are indeed followers.)

So, basically, all the Mormons and Jehovah's witnesses and Branch Davidians are Christians because as far as we know, its your god they claim to comprehend and there is no evidence of disingenuity on their part.

Again they are not because they have other 'holy books/writtings' the superceed the bible/Christ's teachings.

And thus your theology gets skewered in the ass by Euthyphro's first horn.

Ah, no.
Eu's First horn/paradox says that if morality is a standard greater than the 'gods' (plural because it was written to test the validity of the claim of the all powerful greek gods) then the gods were not omnipotent. Because again the standard is greater than the gods themselves making the one who put the 'pious standard' in place greater than the gods who have to obey them.

If the moral value of an act depends on when the command is issued then your god's morality is not constant.

This statement presupposes that any standard is constant. If you believe this name one. Name an instant where it is NEVER ok to 'X'.

The very nature of Morality is constantly moving as in man's world it is the lessor of two evil. On the other hand God's standard is Righteousness (not morality) and as such it is whatever He wants it too be, which is the true earmark of an All powerful God.

If it depends on your god's command and not anything about the act or the circumstances surrounding it, then it is subjective.

Indeed, subjective to the one who spoke creation into existance.
(Before you respond take into consideration the irony of my last statament.)

And here, since god gave the command to kill (thus making it moral and not morally neutral) and he later considers the same action immoral, then your god's morality is self-contradictory.

Not at all. God's commands to Kill are like that of any nation. His command against Killing actually reads, "You shall not Murder." Note it says nothing about killing or the simple act of taking a life. The difference? If God commands the death of another, then the taking of human life is not what hold any righteous/moral value. It is the unsanctioned taking of human life that has been forbidden. rather the taking of life for your own reasons is what has been forbidden. That never changes.

So glad you picked this option.

Me Too!