Problems With The Bible Pt 5 - Sodom and Gomorrah

[KevinM1]

If you want logic, here's some:

People are emotional and logical beings. More emotional than logical in my experience.
God is portrayed as both an emotional and logical being.

Logic tells me that when one emotional being communicates to another emotional being at length, the communication is likely to involve quite a bit of emotion.

What I find illogical is your position that you would expect such communication to be logical like computer code.

You really have no idea what I was getting at, do you?

Hilarious.

Anyway, here's the thing.  The mere fact that you have to apologize for your god, the mere fact that no two Christians agree on the supposed basic tenets of the faith, the mere fact that there are ~40,000 sects... all of that points to a being whose supposed infallible word is incredibly unclear.  I, for one, would think that the purported creator of all things could manage to be unambiguous.  He created the universe, but can't do a little text editing.  Remarkable.

And the only real defense for it that you or any theist has is to rely on the old 'mysterious ways' canard while quoting bible verses, as though the handbook of your faith - which is a poorly written collection of self-contradictory myths - has any authority beyond what it attempts to give itself.  Which is why I posted the circular logic image, because that's mostly what you're doing.

I don't expect god to be exactly like computer code.  I do expect it to be more logical and reasonable than I am.  I'm pretty smart, but I don't consider myself to be the smartest guy on the planet.  Hell, there's a bunch of people here that are much smarter than I am.  Better read, better at punching holes in bad arguments.  But if I, of somewhat above average intellect, can see holes wide enough for an 18-wheeler to drive through, then that's a problem.  I shouldn't be able to outwit god.

And, yeah, bring on emotion!  Faith is supposed to be uplifting and joyous, right?  Well, if it really was, then the threat of hell would be completely unnecessary.  I should want to join the flock because it's fucking awesome, not because my eyelids will slowly be sliced from my body as it burns in a fiery pit.  If the only options are join or torture, doesn't that signify a problem?  Because in my world it certainly does.

The god in your bible makes no sense.  He curses man for a crime that would've been easily avoidable with a little foresight and baby proofing.  He destroys a couple of cities because they're sinful, but lets a pair of daughters rape their father.  Then, he floods the entire planet because it's evil, except for a select few, so, woohoo, more incest.  It takes him sending his son/part of himself down to earth to get murdered before he chills out, but that sucks so bad, he mostly undoes it three days later.

I'm not asking for programming-level logic and consistency.  Dr. Seuss level would be a good starting point.

[Pyrrho]

The problem is that god is initially described in terms of omniscience and omnipotence, and is still described by Christians of all flavors as being perfect.

I'm not so sure about that.  I think that the god of the Bible is pretty poorly defined, and there isn't really a place where a comprehensive description can be found.  As with so much of the Bible, the bits and pieces that are scattered all about can be taken to create a pretty wide range of gods.  It just depends on which bits you select and which you leave out.  You could probably use several different verses to show god to be a normal human being, and several others to show him as an unstoppable force of nature.

Genesis 17:

And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the Lord appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect.


God is described as "almighty" many times in the Bible; for more examples, see:

https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch...ersion=KJV


Jeremiah 32:

17 Ah Lord God! behold, thou hast made the heaven and the earth by thy great power and stretched out arm, and there is nothing too hard for thee:


So we seem to have omnipotence there.


Psalm 147:

5 Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite.


1 John 3:

19 And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him.

20 For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.


So we seem to have omniscience there.

But, you are right, it is scattered about, and there are other verses and stories that contradict such a description of God.

Given the actions of God in the Bible, we know he is evil, no matter how many fools describe him as being good (including fools in the Bible).


For those who need it, when speaking of imaginary characters, one still judges them to be good or bad or whatever; superman, for example, is described as good; his enemies are described as bad.  Of course, they are fictional, but we still describe them.

[John V]

You really have no idea what I was getting at, do you?

Yes, I do. I disagree with what you're getting at.

Anyway, here's the thing.  The mere fact that you have to apologize for your god, the mere fact that no two Christians agree on the supposed basic tenets of the faith, the mere fact that there are ~40,000 sects... all of that points to a being whose supposed infallible word is incredibly unclear.  I, for one, would think that the purported creator of all things could manage to be unambiguous.  He created the universe, but can't do a little text editing.  Remarkable.

And again, you're assuming that a god would necessarily communicate with us in a certain way. As I noted, the Proverbs passage specifically says that god wanted it to take work for us to get truths from his word. I don't see why that would be surprising. It's not uncommon for a teacher to assign a research project when he already knows the correct answer. He does so because he sees value in the research process itself, in addition to the answers to be found.

And the only real defense for it that you or any theist has is to rely on the old 'mysterious ways' canard while quoting bible verses, as though the handbook of your faith - which is a poorly written collection of self-contradictory myths - has any authority beyond what it attempts to give itself.  Which is why I posted the circular logic image, because that's mostly what you're doing.

See above for an explanation of why god might make it difficult for us to get truths from the Bible.

I don't expect god to be exactly like computer code.  I do expect it to be more logical and reasonable than I am.  I'm pretty smart, but I don't consider myself to be the smartest guy on the planet.  Hell, there's a bunch of people here that are much smarter than I am.  Better read, better at punching holes in bad arguments.  But if I, of somewhat above average intellect, can see holes wide enough for an 18-wheeler to drive through, then that's a problem.  I shouldn't be able to outwit god.

So far I haven't seen you outwit god.

And, yeah, bring on emotion!  Faith is supposed to be uplifting and joyous, right?  Well, if it really was, then the threat of hell would be completely unnecessary.  I should want to join the flock because it's fucking awesome, not because my eyelids will slowly be sliced from my body as it burns in a fiery pit.  If the only options are join or torture, doesn't that signify a problem?  Because in my world it certainly does.

Your world is your world. In my experience, people are motivated by different things. Some come to the faith initially due to fear, then grow into joy. Others get to skip the fear. Unlike you, I don't expect every person to behave as I would.

The god in your bible makes no sense.  He curses man for a crime that would've been easily avoidable with a little foresight and baby proofing.  He destroys a couple of cities because they're sinful, but lets a pair of daughters rape their father.  Then, he floods the entire planet because it's evil, except for a select few, so, woohoo, more incest.  It takes him sending his son/part of himself down to earth to get murdered before he chills out, but that sucks so bad, he mostly undoes it three days later.

I'm not asking for programming-level logic and consistency.  Dr. Seuss level would be a good starting point.

If you studied those things, you would find answers. You'd still be free to disagree with them, but at least you would have learned something. But ridicule, memes, and youtube videos are cheap and easy.

[TheRealJoeFish]

PEOPLE, People, people, this will explain everything:

[Nope]

Alphamale, your god acts exactly as it would if it didn't exist.

[robvalue]

God seems to be pretty un-firebombing the UK which has watered down religion so much it's like homeopathic Jesus.

[KevinM1]

I can't help but laugh at your research project analogy.  I was never threatened with eternal torture for a bad effort on a project.

Also, you're doing exactly what I said you would do. "You don't get it.  Read it again.  Read it harder."  It's typical apologist BS.  Have a different opinion than a believer?  You're obviously doing it wrong.  It can't be the source material's fault.  God works in mysterious ways.  He wants you to work hard at your faith.  But!  Get it wrong, or come to the wrong conclusion based on vague biblical accounts that can't even agree on the basics (like the death and resurrection of Jesus), and it's eternal torture for you!

You can see the problem with that, right?

And the threat of hell has always been the stick.  It's what evangelicals use as their last resort to increase the flock.  Always.  Every pastor I've seen, every theist I've talked to both in real life and online, including some friends, does the same thing.  They try to present the glory of god, and how awesome he is.  And when that doesn't sway me (and why would it?  I only have the word of dead Middle Eastern people and believers to go on), it eventually becomes a question on whether I want to rot in hell, even though there's no compelling evidence for that, either.  It's hilarious in its predictability.

Ridicule comes easily when the ideas presented hold little value.  And sometimes memes can convey a thought more efficiently than words.  Just because a meme is used, that doesn't mean the idea(s) presented are meaningless.  That you rage against the delivery mechanism rather than the message is telling.

And, honestly?  No, I haven't read the entire bible.  I see no reason to.  Just like, I'm sure, you haven't read the qua'ran.  I've read certain passages, and through most of Genesis.  All I've found is poorly written nonsense that I'd rather not waste my time with.  At least the Greeks knew how to weave an epic tale.  Much better monsters, too.

But, having been raised in a non-practicing Catholic family, I know the basics.  And they're anything but compelling.    And the same tired arguments people like you attempt to use - you're doing it wrong, read more, read it again, etc. - ring hollow precisely because of the metadata I've mentioned a few times already.  The many, many divisions under the Christian umbrella is evidence enough that you guys don't have the answers.  There's no reason for me to believe in your image of god rather than, say GC's, or Drich's, or Lek's, or prof's.  

And, of course, this is all a distraction from my earlier points, which I'm sure is intentional.  All the verses you've referenced tell me is that the authors and collators of the bible recognized it was a hot mess of inconsistency, and felt forced to add a few "Trust us!  Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" lines to wave it away.  

I have no reason to believe god actually works like that because I have no reason to believe the bible is his infallible word.  And even if it was, all it tells me is that god is immoral because he knowingly sends (or, creates the conditions in which people inevitably send themselves) to hell because he enjoys playing these games of faith.  Games that are laughably inefficient and convoluted.  Either way, I see no reason to place any value on such a creature.  No reason to attempt to learn more from it.

[John V]

I can't help but laugh at your research project analogy.

I'm sure. Ridicule is all you seem to have.

I was never threatened with eternal torture for a bad effort on a project.

Also, you're doing exactly what I said you would do. "You don't get it.  Read it again.  Read it harder."  It's typical apologist BS.  Have a different opinion than a believer?  You're obviously doing it wrong.  It can't be the source material's fault.  God works in mysterious ways.  He wants you to work hard at your faith.  But!  Get it wrong, or come to the wrong conclusion based on vague biblical accounts that can't even agree on the basics (like the death and resurrection of Jesus), and it's eternal torture for you!

You can see the problem with that, right?

The problem I see is that you think you understand the biblical plan of salvation when later you admit you've read very little of the Bible.

Ridicule comes easily when the ideas presented hold little value.  And sometimes memes can convey a thought more efficiently than words.  Just because a meme is used, that doesn't mean the idea(s) presented are meaningless.  That you rage against the delivery mechanism rather than the message is telling.

I agree. A meme doesn't necessarily indicate that the accompanying message is meaningless. Memes are used to add an emotional impact to the message. You don't mind if the message doesn't look like coding if you like the message. It's only when you don't like the message that you complain about the style.

And, honestly?  No, I haven't read the entire bible.  I see no reason to.  Just like, I'm sure, you haven't read the qua'ran.

A difference being that I don't then make charges against the logic of the Quran.

But, having been raised in a non-practicing Catholic family, I know the basics.  And they're anything but compelling.    And the same tired arguments people like you attempt to use - you're doing it wrong, read more, read it again, etc. - ring hollow precisely because of the metadata I've mentioned a few times already.  The many, many divisions under the Christian umbrella is evidence enough that you guys don't have the answers.  There's no reason for me to believe in your image of god rather than, say GC's, or Drich's, or Lek's, or prof's.  

If I point out differences of opinion among scientists regarding some aspect of evolution, the response is usually, Yeah, but they all believe in evolution. Same thing here.

Also, if we all believed the same, you'd simply criticize us for being unthinking sheep - a charge we get despite the many divisions. Go figure.

And, of course, this is all a distraction from my earlier points, which I'm sure is intentional.  All the verses you've referenced tell me is that the authors and collators of the bible recognized it was a hot mess of inconsistency, and felt forced to add a few "Trust us!  Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" lines to wave it away.  

Yes, when you make up your mind that a text is false without having read it, that's what you have to believe.

I have no reason to believe god actually works like that because I have no reason to believe the bible is his infallible word.

Of course not. You'd actually have to read it to have a valid opinion for or against it.

And even if it was, all it tells me is that god is immoral because he knowingly sends (or, creates the conditions in which people inevitably send themselves) to hell because he enjoys playing these games of faith.  Games that are laughably inefficient and convoluted.  Either way, I see no reason to place any value on such a creature.  No reason to attempt to learn more from it.

Says the guy who hasn't read it.

[Iroscato]

The problem I see is that you think you understand the biblical plan of salvation when later you admit you've read very little of the Bible.

"Worship me or burn for eternity."
Seems pretty straightforward. What exactly is missing?

[John V]

"Worship me or burn for eternity."
Seems pretty straightforward. What exactly is missing?

Read the Bible and find out.