"The bible test" Answered.

[xpastor]

Well, Drich, you will recall that I challenged you to respond on some divine commands from the Bible outside the quiz, and I pointed out that they read like a manual for the Taliban: stoning people to death for changing their religion, cutting off hands, killing women and children in time of war.

In your usual manner you dodged the challenge, but referred me to another thread on Man's morality. Thank you. Your very first post makes clear that the God of the Bible does not meet the standard of absolute righteousness which you claim characterizes God, so Yahweh is indeed an immoral bastard according to the presentation in the Bible.

Morality is man's attempt to establish a righteous standard based on the sin he or the society he lives in is willing to except Incorporated into that standard.

Morality is not true Righteousness or God's Righteousness. God's Righteousness is a sinless standard no one can achieve.

Morality says: It is ok to lie to save your friend's life.

Righteousness says: it is always a sin to lie no matter what the reason.

God's righteousness is absolute, and never changes.

Man's Morality is on a sliding scale always identified by the lessor of two evils.

That said know that 'morality' is not the universal standard of good. Morality is a constantly changing to suit the the personal or civil righteousness of a community of people. What once was moral could now be considered a crime, and vise versa.

I say that to help those looking to frame questions based on "morality." Most of the time it is used an absolute standard when in fact it is not. To say "God is not moral" is not the insult you think it is. That is like a death camp nazi saying a German citizen is not 'moral, because he is hiding Jews from the Gestapo. Why? Because your morality like the death camp nazi's morality is based on ever declining scale. The fact there is so much distance between what you think is right and what God has declared as righteous only points to how far you and your 'morality' has fallen beyond true righteousness.

Before I get into the main issue, I have to point out that your reasoning is totally fucked up as usual. First, you say that God's absolute righteousness says it is a sin to lie under any circumstance versus man's relative morality which says it is OK to lie to save a friend. Then at the end you give an example which is exactly contrary to the rule you laid out. You compare a human criticizing God's morality to a death camp Nazi, and by implication you compare God to a righteous citizen hiding Jews from the Gestapo.

But put that aside. We will run with your assertion that "God's righteousness is absolute and never changes." We will even start off with your example that it is always a sin to lie.

Yahweh fails the test:

Now therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil against thee." (2 Chron 18:22)

That of course was directed against Ahab whom God hated, and he sent a lying spirit to 400 prophets to encourage Ahab into a war he would lose.

He does something similar to one of his favorites, David, and to Israel.

On another occasion the Lord was angry with Israel, and he made David bring trouble on them. The Lord said to him, “Go and count the people of Israel and Judah.” (2 Sam 24:1)

God himself tells David to conduct a census, and then he punishes David and the whole nation by killing 70,000 people with a plague. It's just a fable, but if it were true as you believe, it would make God out to be on the level of a schoolyard bully, tempting a smaller kid to do something and then smacking him for it.

Now the Bible certainly claims that God forbids lying. According to the Zondervan Topical Bible there are at least 19 prohibitions of falsehood. But it seems that God sometimes winks at it or even approves.

In Genesis 27 Jacob lies several times to his old blind father, claiming to be the older brother Esau, so Jacob gets the blessing, and God lets him have it.

In Joshua 2 the prostitute Rahab hides the Israelite spies and lies to the king of Jericho that they are no longer in her house. In return she and her whole family are spared when the Israelites sack the city. She is not criticized at all. On the contrary, she is praised in the New Testament:

It was faith that kept the prostitute Rahab from being killed with those who disobeyed God, for she gave the Israelite spies a friendly welcome. (Hebrews 11:31)
It was the same with the prostitute Rahab. She was put right with God through her actions, by welcoming the Israelite spies and helping them to escape by a different road. (James 2:25)

How is this different from the example you gave of lying to save a friend's life, which you say is an example of human morality and not up to the standard of God's righteousness, but the Bble itself says that her act of lying "put her right with God."

I could go on at great length about other moral issues, but I will limit myself to the one great crime of killing another human being.

I'll go back to the passages I quoted in the post you never replied to. There are plenty of OT laws where God prescribes the death penalty for seemingly minor infractions like gathering wood on the Sabbath, but I will only mention one death sentence, the punishment attached to the First Commandment:

Even your brother or your son or your daughter or the wife you love or your closest friend may secretly encourage you to worship other gods, gods that you and your ancestors have never worshiped. Some of them may encourage you to worship the gods of the people who live near you or the gods of those who live far away. But do not let any of them persuade you; do not even listen to them. Show them no mercy or pity, and do not protect them. Kill them! Be the first to stone them, and then let everyone else stone them too. Stone them to death! They tried to lead you away from the Lord your God, who rescued you from Egypt, where you were slaves. Then all the people of Israel will hear what happened; they will be afraid, and no one will ever again do such an evil thing." (Deuteronomy 13:6-11)

When skeptics say they need a sign that gives greater certainty than reading the Bible, Christians like to blather on about how God doesn't want to violate our free will, that he wants us to freely choose to come to him. Well, if a death threat doesn't violate free will, I don't know what else you would call it.

Then there are the war crimes.

Do not spare them [the Amalekites] put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys. (1 Samuel 15:3)

God's orders. Kill them all. The word translated infants specifically means "nursing babies." Even the animals are to be killed for fuck's sake. Don't bother telling me how evil the Amalekites were and how they deserved to die. Nursing infants are not evil.

Can we find something worse in the Bible? Slightly. The above passage presupposes that the genocide will happen in the heat of battle when warriors go crazy. However, look at the next passage. The Israelites have supposedly defeated the Midianites and killed all the men in battle. The women and children are being held as prisoners, and speaking on behalf of God, Moses orders:

Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man. (Numbers 31:17-18)

That would include boys down to nursing infants and all the women who have just lost their husbands and fathers and brothers in battle. Talk about your death camp Nazis! And despite the bullshit you will probably spout, the virgin girls were being kept for sexual purposes.

According to the Bible this God commanded, "Thou shalt not kill" but then the Bible records a whole lot of cases where God orders men to kill women and children in cold blood. You fundamentalists will piss and moan that it is murder if a girl has a first trimester abortion or even if she uses the morning-after pill to expel a blob of a few cells, but you will justify the most outrageous stories if they happen to be recounted in that book with the black covers and the gilt lettering.

So I have showed that the God of the Old Testament was an immoral bastard on his own terms, quod erat demonstandum.

[Ksa]

oh, and the worship me bit. Do you know what Jesus said God's greatest command for us is? To Love the Lord your God with all of your Heart, Mind, Spirit/Soul, and Strength.

If Jesus and the Father are one, and the Jews confirm this means Jesus is saying He is God, this means we are to Love Jesus with all of our Being as well. Meaning we are to Worship Jesus as we would the Father.

The brother is quoting a verse from John, he didn't give the quotation but I'm willing to help him, it is John, Chapter 10 verse 30.

John 10:24 The Jews who were there gathered around him, saying, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.”
John 10:25: Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me,
John 10:26: but you do not believe because you are not my sheep.
John 10:27: My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.
John 10:28: I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand.
John 10:29: My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all[c]; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand.
John 10:30: I and the Father are one.
John 10:31: Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him
John 10:32: but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”
John 10:33: “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”
John 10:34: Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’[d]?
John 10:35: If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside—

The verse is there in the Bible, but what is the context? No Christian so far was able to give me the context, you can attempt brother, after I give the context you can say if it's right or wrong:

John 10:24 The Jews are alleging that Jesus speaks ambiguously, that he is afraid to reveal his true identity. That's the charge, and I will explain why it is a false charge. But the Jews didn't like Jesus much, him calling them a wicked and adulterous generation in Matthew 16:4, fools...SNAKES! They wanted to give Jesus a little bashing. So Jesus says why? "My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all". God seeked for his will to be done and Jesus did the same thing so in purpose they were one "I and the Father are one."

Then in John 10:33, the Jews make another false charge, that Jesus claims to be God. The Christians agree with the Jews, the say he did make such a claim but he was entitled to it. He was entitled. But really? Let's look at what Jesus says next: “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’ The Law here means the Torah. YEE ARE GODS. If God calls them Gods, the persons to whom the word of God came, then the prophets are called Gods in our language. If he was God, this was the perfect opportunity for Jesus to enlighten them on the matter!

God speaks onto Moses and says in EXODUS 7:1: "Behold, I have made you as God to Pharaoh". Was Moses God? And in the book of Psalms 82:6: "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." That's the Jewish language. When a person is called God he is not God! 2 Chorentians 4:4: "and the Devil is the God of this world" Is he God? The Devil? Is the Devil God? Of course not! It just means the Devil is in control. It's the Jewish language, remember that the Bible was translated!

Moses is God onto Pharaoh and Jews are all Gods! It's the Jewish language! Jesus doesn't understand where he actually claimed he was God and tells them, if God calls you Gods, and the scripture cannot be broken, then where's the problem? Accusing him of blaspheming because he said he was the son of God? It's nothing! God has sons by the ton in the Bible. Abraham is the son of God, Adam is the son of God, everyone bound by the spirit of God are sons of God. No problem. So why are the Jews trying to find trouble with him when he says he's the son of God? When others are called Gods?

Jesus never claimed divinity, in fact, he says in John chapter 10 verse 29 "my father is greater than all", John chapter 14 verse 28 "My father is greater than I", Luke chapter 11 verse 20 "I with the finger of God cast out devils", Matthew chapter 12 verse 28 "I cast out devils with the spirit of God", John, chapter 5 verse 30, "I by myself can do NOTHING".

Does that sound like God to you? To me it sounds like a man who believed he was God's messenger, maybe he was, maybe he was schizophrenic we don't know but Jesus never claimed divinity. Why do you worship the poor man? Might as well worship the stones also!

[Drich]

Well, Drich, you will recall that I challenged you to respond on some divine commands from the Bible outside the quiz, and I pointed out that they read like a manual for the Taliban: stoning people to death for changing their religion, cutting off hands, killing women and children in time of war.

In your usual manner you dodged the challenge, but referred me to another thread on Man's morality. Thank you. Your very first post makes clear that the God of the Bible does not meet the standard of absolute righteousness which you claim characterizes God, so Yahweh is indeed an immoral bastard according to the presentation in the Bible.

Indeed He is because again 'morality' is anything you want it to be it is ever changing standard. God's standard does not change therefore can not meet the ever changing requirement needed to be deemed 'moral' by man.
This requires 'the moral' amongest us to seperate himself from God. Which is the same thing Jesus blasted the pharisees for.. Adhearing to thier own version of morality/Righteousness Rather than God's righteousness. Christ identified this 'morality' you are hiding behind as self righteousness. Are you seriously in a position to judge God with this literal self righteous standard?

But put that aside. We will run with your assertion that "God's righteousness is absolute and never changes." We will even start off with your example that it is always a sin to lie.

Yahweh fails the test:

Now therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil against thee." (2 Chron 18:22)That of course was directed against Ahab whom God hated, and he sent a lying spirit to 400 prophets to encourage Ahab into a war he would lose.

In this example you have God sending a spirit of deception to the prophets of ahab. Now all you need do is show that the command "you shall not lie" applies to God. This passage clearly says it does not apply to God.

He does something similar to one of his favorites, David, and to Israel.
On another occasion the Lord was angry with Israel, and he made David bring trouble on them. The Lord said to him, “Go and count the people of Israel and Judah.” (2 Sam 24:1)

God himself tells David to conduct a census, and then he punishes David and the whole nation by killing 70,000 people with a plague. It's just a fable, but if it were true as you believe, it would make God out to be on the level of a schoolyard bully, tempting a smaller kid to do something and then smacking him for it.

Maybe you should look at the ERV before assuming too much. I found a simple version of the bible may make it easier to understand what is really going on.

24 The Lord was angry with Israel again.
This is the reason God 'tested' the Jews in the following passages,

He caused David to turn against the Israelites. He told David, “Go count the people of Israel and Judah.”2 King David said to Joab, the captain of the army, “Go through all the tribes of Israel from Dan to Beersheba,[a] and count the people. Then I will know how many people there are.”

God gives David this test to give to the jews. This 'test' will determine who they truly follow, David or God. For God gave a command for them to never be counted, and David gave a command that contradicted what God said. Whatever they do next will determine who the love more.

Because they followed the words of David over God, God had the right and now the reason/proof to have tested them, and punished them.

Now the Bible certainly claims that God forbids lying.

Forbids who from lying? Can you provide book Chapter and verse that say He/God is not able to lie?

According to the Zondervan Topical Bible there are at least 19 prohibitions of falsehood.

All point to the restriction of this act for men. Remeber God never commanded "thou shal not lie." The Commandment God gave is "you shall not bear false witness against your neighbor." Moses issued the decree in his law 'you shall not lie' which was picked up in the NT by the apstoles... None of which have authority over God.

But it seems that God sometimes winks at it or even approves.

Again because the act of intentional deception in of itself holds no value. It is when one deceives outside of the allowances God himself provides that deception becomes a lie. Therefore it can be said To lie is always wrong.

In Genesis 27 Jacob lies several times to his old blind father, claiming to be the older brother Esau, so Jacob gets the blessing, and God lets him have it.

Never once in any accurate translation is this deception identified as a lie. Why? Divine Provenance, God blessed and allowed for that deception. Which when authorized by God said deception is not a lie, as witnessed here and every other instance you care to bring up when God authorizes a deception.

You have to remember God never commanded 'thou shall not lie.' That was moses several generations after what happens in Gen 27.

In Joshua 2 the prostitute Rahab hides the Israelite spies and lies to the king of Jericho that they are no longer in her house. In return she and her whole family are spared when the Israelites sack the city. She is not criticized at all. On the contrary, she is praised in the New Testament:

It was faith that kept the prostitute Rahab from being killed with those who disobeyed God, for she gave the Israelite spies a friendly welcome. (Hebrews 11:31)
It was the same with the prostitute Rahab. She was put right with God through her actions, by welcoming the Israelite spies and helping them to escape by a different road. (James 2:25)

How is this different from the example you gave of lying to save a friend's life, which you say is an example of human morality and not up to the standard of God's righteousness, but the Bble itself says that her act of lying "put her right with God."

I could go on at great length about other moral issues, but I will limit myself to the one great crime of killing another human being.

..and i could go point by point demonstrating one after another that God is not subject to the law of moses. And that all of your work here shows God does indeed authorize deception. Which means you do not understand the basics of who God is, or you would not have spent so much time putting this whole failed arguement together.

What denomination were you a pastor of again? what seminary did you goto? Stuff like this make it harder and harder for me to believe you were a pastor.

I'll go back to the passages I quoted in the post you never replied to. There are plenty of OT laws where God prescribes the death penalty for seemingly minor infractions like gathering wood on the Sabbath, but I will only mention one death sentence, the punishment attached to the First Commandment:

i like it when you all get belligerent, it means i get to take my gloves off too

When skeptics say they need a sign that gives greater certainty than reading the Bible, Christians like to blather on about how God doesn't want to violate our free will, that he wants us to freely choose to come to him. Well, if a death threat doesn't violate free will, I don't know what else you would call it.

Do 'Christians' say this or did you say this as a failed pastor? Because a 5 min google search and a sunday school understanding of the works of Paul (in the book of Romans) would first say free will is a work of greek philosphy and not a biblical precept. Because Paul (in romans) Tells us the oppsite. That we are not 'free willed' but slaves (mind and body) to sin. as such can not excersize 'freewill' but can only do the will of our master, sin.

God doesnot grant all of us 'freewill.' He simply gives us the ability to choose the option of redemption or to remain under the complete control of sin. It is through redemption that our hearts will find freedom, even though our bodies and our minds are still subject to the will of sin.

If you do not think this to be true then simply 'will yourself' to not sin. Can't? wonder why that is?

Then there are the war crimes.

All of these can be dismissed because our laws state no one can be convicted of an act before the act was made illegal.
Your examples took place thousands and thousands of years before the term 'war crime' was even considered.

According to the Bible this God commanded, "Thou shalt not kill"

even a failed pastor should know better than this. The command is you shall not murder, not you shall not kill. The difference? The same between deception and a lie. God's authorization. Taking human life is not an intrinsically good nor a bad thing. the act is netural. what assigns how it should be viewed is the reason or authority(or the lack of it) given to us to take another life by God.

So I have showed that the God of the Old Testament was an immoral bastard on his own terms, quod erat demonstandum.

you have indeed shown the bible and God to be immoral, but so what? Your standard is like toilet paper, It's only good for a little while. once someone finds fault or stain it is discarded never to be considered again.

[Ksa]

Exactly. Where is this mentioned in the Bible? I am an atheist but, I keep an open mind, so if you can produce a single unequivocal statement from the Bible where Jesus himself says "I am God" or where he says "worship me" I'm ready to embrace Christianity.

Promise?

---

This all comes from John 10:
30 The Father and I are one.”

31 Again the Jews there picked up stones to kill Jesus. 32 But he said to them, “The many wonderful things you have seen me do are from the Father. Which of these good things are you killing me for?”

33 They answered, “We are not killing you for any good thing you did. But you say things that insult God. You are only a man, but you say you are the same as God! That is why we are trying to kill you!”

(The Jews sure though Jesus just claimed to be God, to the point of not needing a trial or any discussion like they did when they finally put him to death.)

36 So why do you accuse me of insulting God for saying, ‘I am God’s Son’? I am the one God chose and sent into the world. 37 If I don’t do what my Father does, then don’t believe what I say. 38 But if I do what my Father does, you should believe in what I do. You might not believe in me, but you should believe in the things I do. Then you will know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.”

Meaning Christ and The Father are the Same/Both are God.

---

So you got your sunday cloths pick out yet? or will you try and back out of what you said?

" If I don’t do what my Father does, then don’t believe what I say."

Clearly states that they are "one" in purpose. And AGAIN the Christians misunderstood his sayings. What's the problem with him being the son of God delivering his message? Just like I am the son of God, you are the son of God, anyone bound by the spirit of God is the son of God.

In verse 38 he means that the Father is in him meaning that God works his will through him, and he is in the father meaning he does God's will, like it is mentioned in John 7:28-29 which says:

"Yes, you know me and you know where I am from. But I have not come by my own authority. I was sent by the One (God) who is true. You don't know him. But I know him and I am from him. He sent me."

God knew Jesus long before he was born, like it is mentioned in Jeremiah 1:5 which says:

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations."

So God knew Jeremiah, Jeremiah was in the mind of God, long before entering his mother's womb, just like Jesus was, just like you was, just like Hitler was etc. That's what Jesus means by I knew God and God knew me...God knew all of us!

The difference Jesus emphasizes is that he himself knew God, as he was a messenger, but so did Moses. In fact, Moses met God in person! Why don't you worship him! Jesus met God before his birth, Moses met God in person, who's greater?

[Lemonvariable72]

So basically it is wrong to lie or murder except one god does it

[Minimalist]

This principle works in our world as well. In the United states there is only one governing authority over everything, but within this goverment there are three branches. The executive (The office president) The Legislative (Congress/The house) The judicial (The Courts)

Keep it up, drippy. You're going to give idiots a bad name.

[Tonus]

Forbids who from lying? Can you provide book Chapter and verse that say He/God is not able to lie?

You know, when I saw this I immediately thought of Hebrews 6:18 ("it is impossible for God to lie") but the context implies, not that god cannot ever lie, but that when he swears an oath he can be trusted to keep it.

Hebrews 6:16 People swear by someone greater than themselves, and the oath confirms what is said and puts an end to all argument. 17 Because God wanted to make the unchanging nature of his purpose very clear to the heirs of what was promised, he confirmed it with an oath. 18 God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope set before us may be greatly encouraged. 19 We have this hope as an anchor for the soul, firm and secure.

I read the "two unchanging natures" to refer to his purpose and his oath. Although why a being with an unchanging purpose would need to swear an oath is beyond me. But there does not seem to be any scripture that says that god cannot lie, and this scripture would imply that he is quite able to, barring those times when he swears an oath or if a lie would run contrary to his purpose. I admit I find it pretty fascinating.

[Ksa]

It is also mentioned in the book of Hebrews, in chapter 7 and verse 3 which says about Melchizedek:

"Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever."

Jesus had a mother, no father and he had an apparent end, because we do not agree on that either, but Melchizedek, he had NO FATHER and NO MOTHER, No beginning of days, NO end of life.

Who is that? That's God! Without father and mother is God! Without beginning of days is God! Melchizedek! He's the one who deserves true worship if anything...not a child born in a stable WHAT MAKES HIM GOD!

I want you to say you know, this child who made his mother impure for 40 days, he's God! He's Jehovah! He's Allah! He's God!

In fact, Jesus never claimed divinity. Do you know that in India alone, over 10,000 people have claimed divinity? Why do you have to worship that one man who never claimed such a thing? Why are you so unreasonable?

Bible says that Jesus, when he was 8 days old he was circumcised. God? Getting circumcised?

[xpastor]

Sorry, but speaking as one atheist to another, that is a rash statement Ksa. I certainly believe that the historical Jesus never uttered such a claim, but the gospel writers decades after his death put words in his mouth, especially the gospel attributed to John, e.g., "I and my father are one."

Proof? or are you expressing your ablity for great faith in the unknown/unknowable?

Drich, you are very fond of "rolling on the floor laughing out loud." What you don't understand is that everyone is laughing at you. Not because we are hard core atheists, but because your attempts at logical argument are so pathetic. You make about as much sense as a turkey gobbling.

Do yourself a favor. Read and study some of the Christian apologists whom you might agree with like C.S. Lewis. Or maybe William Lane Craig; I've never read Craig but he is popular in Christan circles. If you really absorbed theologians like this, you probably would not get us to change our minds, but we would at least have some respect for you.

As for the dates of the New Testament books and how they have added to the words of Jesus, no, I don't take things on faith. That's a characteristic of fundamentalists. I rely on evidence. Now evidence never grants complete 100% certainty, but after more than 100 years of the so-called higher criticism, most people coming to the question without prejudices in advance will conclude that the weight of evidence raises grave doubts about the integrity of the Bible. I can't teach you this in two easy posts. You need to read dozens of books to grasp the arguments. I can only suggest that you start with 4 or 5 books by Bart Ehrman and then branch out to the books which he refers to.

Your attempts at logic are presently hopeless. They never amount to more than a childish assertion "Me smart, you dumb." I am not going to waste any more time on you unless you broaden your horizons and smarten up.

[Ksa]

^ He'll have trouble doing that because the trinity, The "only begotten son" sentence and the ascension have been thrown out of the Bible as a fabrication, as an interpolation, as an innovation to the original manuscript. Thrown out by whom? Not by atheists, but by 32 Christian scholars, of the highest eminence, backed up by 50 denominations found out that it was an innovation and they threw it out of the RSV (revised standard version) of the Bible.

The trinity being, The father is a person, the son is a person, the holy spirit is a person, but they're not 3 persons but one person is non-sense in all languages of the world. It's a fabrication.