Gods supposed perfection

[Losty]

So, instead, you create a god in your mind who created you just to fuck with you. Makes perfect sense.

Are you suggesting that I created the God of the Bible in my mind?

I am suggesting that after reading and/or studying parts of the bible and being exposed to the views of Christians around you, you created your own god in your mind and then called it the god of the bible. Yes.

[Little Rik]

I guess perhaps I address this question to theists...if God is so perfect, and created Adam and eve as perfect in his image, then why did they disobey him? If they were created without sin then how is it they came to sin? I'm not talking about the stupid tree of knowledge, I'm asking how it was they were so susceptible to satan? Which leads me to another question, God created satan himself, from what I understand he was a perfect angel, then how is it he also came to sin? This seems to me God is in fact fallible, or else deliberately set us up to fail, seeing as how sin should not exist unless he made it so. As a burgeoning atheist, this is one of the biggest issues I have with theism. I wish to hear as many points of view as possible on this one, not just Christians please.

Religions gave their own interpretation to what God suppose to have said or do so your question should really be directed to religious people not theist in general like myself which have nothing to do with religions.
Not only this.
If you really would like to know what God say or do why not establish a relationship with that entity so you may better understand how all the system works.

[orangebox21]

No, he is not justified in torturing people for eternity.

How do you know that it's torture and how do you know He's not justified?

I said somewhere recently, in this thread or another, that if it was some sort of community service for a finite amount of time, I'd be happy to work it off for any crimes I've done.

You're proposing that we let the criminals determine their own sentence?

I'd like to think you aren't stupid enough to not get this. There are more reasonable and constructive ways to meet out justice than eternal hellfire.

According to what standard?

I have not killed anyone, despite being tempted to. I have not raped anyone despite being tempted to. I have not stolen things, despite being tempted to.

“Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood and was praying this to himself: ‘God, I thank You that I am not like other people: swindlers, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week; I pay tithes of all that I get.’ 13 But the tax collector, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, ‘God, be [f]merciful to me, the sinner!’ 14 I tell you, this man went to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted.”

Yet I would apparently be judged by your god for thoughts as if they were actions. These are the kinds of things I have no control over, yet apparently would be judged for.

We haven't been discussing anything about thoughts. Our context has been about actions, of which you've admitted wrongdoing (see post #40 paragraph 2). Is God just in punishing you for the wrong you have done?

That sounds legit but remember the main point. When man ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil he then knew what is good and evil just like God knows the difference. So man is therefore able to judge God's actions as being either good or evil. Man has done that and found God wanting because God's actions are mostly evil. As it says in the New Testament, man will judge angels. It should have also said that man will judge God as well.

An account and definition of 'good' and 'evil' would be necessary for this judgment to be made. Please provide them.

The former is a subset of the latter; eternal punishment for finite crimes is morally wrong, and therefore the bible is in error when it describes god as morally good and perfect.

Understood.

---

To begin with, punishment serves two purposes; atonement and rehabilitation. By definition, infinite punishment for finite crime will become excessive at some point, and rehabilitation is impossible if the punishment is all there will ever be from that point on. That makes it unjust, and hence immoral. Additionally, torture is the epitome of cruel and unusual punishment, and we generally call the infliction of punishment for crimes we cannot avoid committing "entrapment," and when the punishment is handed down by an authority without any accountability or requirement to be a representative of the people, that's called a dictatorship. All immoral.

So eternal punishment is excluded from any normal understanding of regular morality, let alone perfect morality. Therefore, any being performing eternal punishment cannot be morally perfect, and therefore the claims about god in the bible do not accurately reflect the character it portrays. How will you attempt to reconcile this? Well, I've no doubt you'll appeal to some special other morality that god has, some magic quality or reason that makes it okay that god possesses and we don't. Aside from being special pleading, this is the Argument from Vague Possible reasons I alluded to before, and it's, yes, redefining the term morality to mean something other than it means.

---

[Chad32]

No, he is not justified in torturing people for eternity.

How do you know that it's torture and how do you know He's not justified?

I said somewhere recently, in this thread or another, that if it was some sort of community service for a finite amount of time, I'd be happy to work it off for any crimes I've done.

You're proposing that we let the criminals determine their own sentence?

I'd like to think you aren't stupid enough to not get this. There are more reasonable and constructive ways to meet out justice than eternal hellfire.

According to what standard?

I have not killed anyone, despite being tempted to. I have not raped anyone despite being tempted to. I have not stolen things, despite being tempted to.

“Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood and was praying this to himself: ‘God, I thank You that I am not like other people: swindlers, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week; I pay tithes of all that I get.’ 13 But the tax collector, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, ‘God, be [f]merciful to me, the sinner!’ 14 I tell you, this man went to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted.”

Yet I would apparently be judged by your god for thoughts as if they were actions. These are the kinds of things I have no control over, yet apparently would be judged for.

We haven't been discussing anything about thoughts. Our context has been about actions, of which you've admitted wrongdoing (see post #40 paragraph 2). Is God just in punishing you for the wrong you have done?

The place you go if you don't believe has been described as a lake of fire where you will burn forever. Eternal fiery torture is not justified against someone who at best as committed less than a century of crimes. Now some people believe the fire will just destroy your soul, and you won't exist anymore, and some have described it as just a separation from god. Since they believe all goodness comes from god, then they assume being separated from him would be a miserable existence.

I'm proposing that the punishment should fit the crime, and that it be constructive. Not just floating in a lake of fire for eternity. Rehabilitation is this nice thing going on recently where they try to make you better, and not just make you suffer because of the bad things you did. I'm pretty sure if a judge decided death by fire would be the sentence for everyone, he wouldn't keep his job for long.

According to the standard of the culture I grew up in, and the moral code I developed over the years of my life.

I'm not that humble. I think I am worth more than god seems to think I am, and I will speak up for myself and others. I do not draw my worth by what someone else says I am, and I do not draw my morals from what someone else says is moral. I decide for myself because I am a free thinking person.

[orangebox21]

The place you go if you don't believe has been described as a lake of fire where you will burn forever. Eternal fiery torture is not justified against someone who at best as committed less than a century of crimes.

I'm asking you the reasons you have for believing hell to be torture and that eternal punishment is not justified. Restating the original assertion is not a reason.

I'm proposing that the punishment should fit the crime, and that it be constructive. Not just floating in a lake of fire for eternity. Rehabilitation is this nice thing going on recently where they try to make you better, and not just make you suffer because of the bad things you did. I'm pretty sure if a judge decided death by fire would be the sentence for everyone, he wouldn't keep his job for long.

The 'rehabilitation' you seek is found in Christ and His work on the cross. If you want to be rehabilitated then repent and place your faith and trust in Jesus Christ. If you want to determine for yourself what defines rehabilitation, you will spend an eternity working it out.

According to the standard of the culture I grew up in, and the moral code I developed over the years of my life.

And if someone where to develop a moral code according to the years of their life and the standard of the culture they grew up in that celebrated human sacrifice, does that make human sacrifice moral?

I'm not that humble. I think I am worth more than god seems to think I am, and I will speak up for myself and others. I do not draw my worth by what someone else says I am, and I do not draw my morals from what someone else says is moral. I decide for myself because I am a free thinking person.

6 For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For one will hardly die for a righteous man; [d]though perhaps for the good man someone would dare even to die. 8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

If God viewed people as worthless, then He wouldn't have sacrificed Himself for them [the ungodly].

[Chad32]

I don't know what else to say. I believe it's torture because being on fire is painful, and the idea of eternal suffering for finite crimes being bad should be self evident. What exactly are you expecting me to say?

If I feel the need to apologize for something I did wrong, I apologize to the people I've wronged. If Yahweh and Jesus think I've wronged them, they should come down and we'll have a talk about it.

Human sacrifice doesn't help Humanity as a whole. That's why it isn't done in civilized areas. Morality that helps Humanity is that which helps the most people, and hurts the least. That's why all cultures criminalize murder, though all cultures have exceptions to this.

God's opinion of our worth is determined by our capacity to worship him. He';s completely self serving, and sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself just makes his self serving nature all the more glaring.

[ThomM]

If a god actually was PERFECT - then the very first perfection is would have is the ability to prove its own existence AND prove the lack of existence of all the other claimed gods


TO date - no claimed supernatural god has ever had that ability - and just the fact that it does not have that ability proves the claim about the god is false.

[Ksa]

This is the answer as to why Jesus had to die, why the cross is necessary. Namely, it is how can God be completely merciful and just.

That's justice and logic? Imagine a big ruler has 100 commander servants who steal, rape, murder...and one day he calls them all in a meeting and tells them, I know all the deeds you do BUT, here's my son, I kill him, and if you believe I killed him, your sins are forgiven. You can go back to raping also!

Does that sound logical? Is God illogical? God is very logical in its definition, it is the Christians that are illogical! It is mentioned in Ezekiel 18:20:

""The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father’s iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son’s iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.""

You also mentioned Adam, I ask you, before eating the fruit, did Adam come and ask you? He didn't ask me also! So why should I be responsible for his sin, and if inherited, how was sin inherited? And why was it not inherited in Jesus also!? So I hope this ends the argument and that brother orange realizes he worshiped a false belief.

[orangebox21]

I don't know what else to say. I believe it's torture because being on fire is painful, and the idea of eternal suffering for finite crimes being bad should be self evident. What exactly are you expecting me to say?

I realize I'm being a bit tough on you. I'm looking for a good definition for torture (does a person being in pain necessitate they are being tortured as you have suggested above? No), and for a reason that isn't arbitrary or subjective.

When the atheist claims that people suffer eternal punishment for finite crimes they leave out an important qualification: against an eternal being. The argument should be: eternal punishment for finite crimes against an eternal being is immoral.

If I feel the need to apologize for something I did wrong, I apologize to the people I've wronged. If Yahweh and Jesus think I've wronged them, they should come down and we'll have a talk about it.

He did come down, at the incarnation, and is talking to you, through is word.

Human sacrifice doesn't help Humanity as a whole. That's why it isn't done in civilized areas. Morality that helps Humanity is that which helps the most people, and hurts the least. That's why all cultures criminalize murder, though all cultures have exceptions to this.

The standard by which you have developed your morality is the years of your life and the culture you grew up in. Historically speaking, other cultures have developed a morality based upon their culture and the years of their lives. If both moralities have been developed by the same standard, then what makes yours right and the other wrong? There is nothing to differentiate your moral code from a culture that practices human sacrifices. Both would be moral.

God's opinion of our worth is determined by our capacity to worship him.

References for this assertion.

He';s completely self serving, and sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself just makes his self serving nature all the more glaring.

If it were true that God sacrificing Himself to Himself was completely self serving, then there could be no benefit to anyone other than Himself. Yet, to those who place their faith and trust in Him have been given the gift of eternal life. It is not true that God's sacrifice is completely self serving.

If a god actually was PERFECT - then the very first perfection is would have is the ability to prove its own existence AND prove the lack of existence of all the other claimed gods

2 Kings 1
1 Kings 18
Exodus 7
etc.

Then again, "'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.'"

TO date - no claimed supernatural god has ever had that ability - and just the fact that it does not have that ability proves the claim about the god is false.

Does ability necessitate doing? Perhaps God has the ability to prove His own existence and to prove the lack of existence of all the other claimed gods but chooses not to do so in the way you want Him to.

This is the answer as to why Jesus had to die, why the cross is necessary. Namely, it is how can God be completely merciful and just.

That's justice and logic? Imagine a big ruler has 100 commander servants who steal, rape, murder...and one day he calls them all in a meeting and tells them, I know all the deeds you do BUT, here's my son, I kill him,

God didn't kill Him. "18 No one takes it [His life] from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.” John 10:18.

and if you believe I killed him, your sins are forgiven.

To those who trust in the work of Christ.

You can go back to raping also!

A lie. " What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer?" Romans 6

Does that sound logical?

First refine your premises to accurately represent the Biblical position, then we can test the logic.

Is God illogical? God is very logical in its definition, it is the Christians that are illogical! It is mentioned in Ezekiel 18:20:

""The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father’s iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son’s iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.""

All true. The wages of my personal sin is death. I am not punished for Adam's sins but for my own.

You also mentioned Adam, I ask you, before eating the fruit, did Adam come and ask you? He didn't ask me also! So why should I be responsible for his sin, and if inherited, how was sin inherited?

You are responsible for your sin. Sin entered the world through one man and likewise salvation entered the world through one man (Romans 5:12-21).

And why was it not inherited in Jesus also!? So I hope this ends the argument and that brother orange realizes he worshiped a false belief.

Federal headship. Who was Jesus' father? Was it a man (who's head is Adam) or was it God the father?

[Chad32]

---

I don't know what else to say. I believe it's torture because being on fire is painful, and the idea of eternal suffering for finite crimes being bad should be self evident. What exactly are you expecting me to say?

I realize I'm being a bit tough on you. I'm looking for a good definition for torture (does a person being in pain necessitate they are being tortured as you have suggested above? No), and for a reason that isn't arbitrary or subjective.

When the atheist claims that people suffer eternal punishment for finite crimes they leave out an important qualification: against an eternal being. The argument should be: eternal punishment for finite crimes against an eternal being is immoral.

If I feel the need to apologize for something I did wrong, I apologize to the people I've wronged. If Yahweh and Jesus think I've wronged them, they should come down and we'll have a talk about it.

He did come down, at the incarnation, and is talking to you, through is word.

Human sacrifice doesn't help Humanity as a whole. That's why it isn't done in civilized areas. Morality that helps Humanity is that which helps the most people, and hurts the least. That's why all cultures criminalize murder, though all cultures have exceptions to this.

The standard by which you have developed your morality is the years of your life and the culture you grew up in. Historically speaking, other cultures have developed a morality based upon their culture and the years of their lives. If both moralities have been developed by the same standard, then what makes yours right and the other wrong? There is nothing to differentiate your moral code from a culture that practices human sacrifices. Both would be moral.

God's opinion of our worth is determined by our capacity to worship him.

References for this assertion.

He';s completely self serving, and sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself just makes his self serving nature all the more glaring.

If it were true that God sacrificing Himself to Himself was completely self serving, then there could be no benefit to anyone other than Himself. Yet, to those who place their faith and trust in Him have been given the gift of eternal life. It is not true that God's sacrifice is completely self serving.

---

I don't even think I should have to debate the idea of being on fire forever for no other reason than someone created a lake of fire to put unbelievers in is torture. I have nothing more to say about that.

Morality is subjective, and changes over time, but a form of morality that helps the most people while hindering the least helps society grow faster. Killing people doesn't help the group, which is why it's normally illegal, and we know that killing people isn't going to stop a storm from blowing in, or the ground from shaking or a volcano from erupting. Unless you can come up with a sound reason for killing someone, and show that cutting someone's heart out on an altar really makes a difference, then you can't convince someone it's the right thing to do.

The most important thing Yahweh wants from you is worship. The main requirement for him accepting you or casting you out is worship. Regardless of any good deeds or bad deeds you have done in your life, the most important thing he's concerned about is whether or not you worship him. Even when you get to heaven, the main thing you'll be doing is worshiping him. That is the only thing Yahweh is concerned about, and the bible makes it clear that's where his priorities lie.

He does not talk to me through a book written by people long ago that claimed to be inspired by him. If my mother wants to talk to me, she does not ask my sister to write a letter and send it to me. she actually calls me up and speaks to me.