Why I Quit Christianity

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Thanks for your speedy and very honest response. I haven't finished the book yet (just started it yesterday) but if I have anything semi-intelligent to say upon completion, I'll let you know :-)

Great! And don't be shy if you have any questions, comments, or criticisms.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Your reasons for rejecting the biblical God are completely absurd. If there is evidence of mathematical design in the bible that could not have been produced by man, then THAT supports the claims of the bible ITSELF that it was inspired by God REGARDLESS of your personal objections against his character portrayed therein. In other words, you can call the biblical God a tyrant until you're blue in the face. But don't lie to yourself and act like he doesn't exist or that biblical numerics doesn't confirm the clear assertions of the open text.

As far as the "errors" in the bible, you do realize that virtually NONE of the beloved scientific theories are set in stone, right? So when you find an area of disagreement between the PROVEN bible and modern, fallible science that is always subject to change, which one do you think is most likely to win out in the end? I'll let you figure it out.

Btw, this is the user Gambini. I was just too lazy to sign in because I'm using my smartphone right now

Hey there Gambini,

It is good to be on a "first name basis."

I'm really glad you feel free to speak you mind! That's the way I like it.

I don't see any "absurdity" in my rejection of Yahweh. You will have to point it out to me (please be very specific). I do not reject Yahweh merely because he is a "tyrant" but for many reasons that cumulatively imply that if he existed, he wouldn't have the intelligence to design the Bible Wheel or the Holographs. It's a "Catch 22" if you know what I mean. The kind of intelligence implied by the design of Genesis 1:1 is of an entirely different order than that which governs the behavior of Yahweh recorded in the Bible. Any being with sufficient intelligence to appreciate the design of the Bible will necessarily reject its description of God. Fascinating paradox, isn't it?

Now as for your charge that I am "lying to myself" - that's simply not true. I am very open and honest about why I came to these conclusions and the proof is my willingness to publicly receive any and all criticism. I have nothing to hide. It is true that the Bible Wheel is profoundly integrated with the message of the plain text. I have always been especially impressed with Spoke 22 where the theme of Consummation is so wonderfully expressed in perfect harmony with its position as the last Spoke that "closes the circle." The whole Wheel is like this. It is numinous and profound and tightly integrated with the whole flow of the Biblical story from Genesis to Revelation. But I can't believe the story in the sense that it is believed by Christians. I don't believe that people are sinners in need of salvation. I don't believe that the true God commanded the murder of every man, woman, and child of the Midianites except for 32,000 sexy virgins who were then distributed to the very soldiers who slaughtered every person they ever loved. It is simply impossible to believe such disgusting crap. So what's your solution? If you have any suggestions, I hope you know that my ears are open. But please keep one thing in mind - I'm not interested in inventing my own interpretation and I won't accept any attempts to whitewash the bullshit. Any answer must be worthy of God.

As for science and the errors in the Bible - the errors I am talking about will not be fixed by any advancement of science. For example, we are not going to find out that the earth is really flat and that there is a solid dome holding up the waters above. And we are not going to discover that the earth is really 6,000 years old.

I really appreciate your comments, and hope this conversation will continue.

All the very best,

Richard

Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough

I don't see any "absurdity" in my rejection of Yahweh. You will have to point it out to me (please be very specific). I do not reject Yahweh merely because he is a "tyrant" but for many reasons that cumulatively imply that if he existed, he wouldn't have the intelligence to design the Bible Wheel or the Holographs. It's a "Catch 22" if you know what I mean. The kind of intelligence implied by the design of Genesis 1:1 is of an entirely different order than that which governs the behavior of Yahweh recorded in the Bible. Any being with sufficient intelligence to appreciate the design of the Bible will necessarily reject its description of God. Fascinating paradox, isn't it?

Richard

It's unintelligent of a being to make a design in a book which He intends that people shall not believe in the stories there. Only the mathematich and design of it. Thats an unintelligent paradox.
An intelligent being would of course make people see the mathematics of creation and make a book about himself containing mathematics and design of the supernatural.

Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough

But I can't believe the story in the sense that it is believed by Christians. I don't believe that people are sinners in need of salvation. I don't believe that the true God commanded the murder of every man, woman, and child of the Midianites except for 32,000 sexy virgins who were then distributed to the very soldiers who slaughtered every person they ever loved. It is simply impossible to believe such disgusting crap. So what's your solution? If you have any suggestions, I hope you know that my ears are open. But please keep one thing in mind - I'm not interested in inventing my own interpretation and I won't accept any attempts to whitewash the bullshit. Any answer must be worthy of God.

Richard

I see you always brings this up to see what anwser you get back from us believers of the the stories in the bible. I find it facinating that such a story is there, but we who believes does not do the same and back that up with scripture. And you have to bring up sexy virgins from your filthy guilty mind, as are we all, but good luck defending yourself, rejecting Jesus.
This is a story we believe is from God, but we don't do the same and back it up with scripture, because we have Jesus in our hearts. But we do believe it' is something God could forsee as a good thing for the future without having to intervine all the time, giving us what we live for, free will.
God can forsee everything, the ultimate mathematician. He sees men's future in every action he makes, thats why he could prophecy about Jesus hidden in texts in another stories in the bible, He saw what would happen when Jesus was put in place at the time of the roman empire.
So the sexy virgins became jews, history of the stories in the bible gives us a mind play, and also in the spiritual. You failed by taking just the knowlegde of the letters to proclaim you have a better heart then everybody who don't see this as bad. Your pro-potsmoking alone shows how bad your heart really is of jugding.
And trying to make people have free will again without Jesus. You should know better if you were wise. I think you have smoked up your wiseness.

Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough

I have always been especially impressed with Spoke 22 where the theme of Consummation is so wonderfully expressed in perfect harmony with its position as the last Spoke that "closes the circle." The whole Wheel is like this. It is numinous and profound and tightly integrated with the whole flow of the Biblical story from Genesis to Revelation.

Richard

Yes, you found the design, but that dosen't mean you own it. Look at Jesus parable where the workers wanted to kill the son of the owner of the field to make it theirs.
I remeber about 22, you wrote about bride in hebrew, is "Kallah" the same word is used when Jesus cried "it is finished" at the cross, meaning the finish of us as humans is the marriage between God and men, trough the work of Jesus. It made me like you book so much. But maybe it is good you don't believe in Jesus anymore, so much that you wanted this to be your own finding, putting Jesus so much lower. Maybe if you humble yourself again to see that design you found, is not your own works. And put Jesus in his right place again, maybe then you don't have to defend yourself behind 32,000 sexy virgins.

Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough

As for science and the errors in the Bible - the errors I am talking about will not be fixed by any advancement of science. For example, we are not going to find out that the earth is really flat and that there is a solid dome holding up the waters above. And we are not going to discover that the earth is really 6,000 years old.

Richard

You are so smart Richard, you ooze of proudness. No wonder you dont want to believe in Jesus, He would have taken so much of that away from you. Proudness was the fall of satan you know.

Originally Posted by Roberto

It's unintelligent of a being to make a design in a book which He intends that people shall not believe in the stories there. Only the mathematich and design of it. Thats an unintelligent paradox.
An intelligent being would of course make people see the mathematics of creation and make a book about himself containing mathematics and design of the supernatural.

Hey there Roberto,

I'm glad you jumped in to this conversation.

I don't think you really understand the problem I am grappling with. The patterns have a beauty, symmetry, and sense of deep intelligence. The plain text of the Bible is the opposite. It seems primitive, brutal, and irrational. How could the same "intelligent being" have produced both? How are we supposed to understand this paradox? It is obvious to me that God does not want me to believe falsehood, so I cannot deny that the Bible contains real errors, contradictions, absurdities in logic and fact, and moral abominations attributed to God.

You say it would be "unintelligent of a being to make make a design in a book which He intends that people shall not believe in the stories there." I agree. But it's not an "unintelligent paradox." It is a profound paradox. It is impossible to believe that God intends for us to believe the Bible in the way that you believe it because that contradicts reality. There must be some other explanation for how the patterns got in it and what they mean. It could be that Christians who interpret it the way you do have merely imposed their own false understanding on it. One possibility is that the errors, contradictions, and moral abominations could be a "test" to reveal if a person values truth and righteousness over unbiblical man-made doctrines of "inerrancy and infallibility" which are blatantly false. Here is how I stated this question in my thread called Is the Bible a Test?:

Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough

For nearly two decades I was completely enamored with the Bible. Every time I opened it, it felt like God was talking to me. It was always fresh, new, and alive - the Living Word.

I felt that I had an unfair advantage over other Christians who thought they must either justify everything in the Bible or admit that it wasn't really "God's Word." The Bible Wheel gave me an alternative. I could confidently state that the Bible was "God's Book" without imposing the false man-made doctrine that it contained no errors. I always held that God was free to produce whatever kind of book would serve his purposes, and given that the Bible was filled with apparent contradictions and errors, I simply accepted that as part of God's purpose. I understood it as God giving the believer everything needed to believe, and the unbeliever everything needed to not believe.

I think this is the highest view of Scripture. It is the view that accepts the Bible as given, warts and all. It doesn't try to "correct it" as if God were an incompetent author. Sure, there are many things that are mere misunderstandings and not errors or contradictions. Those things should be explained. But there are many things that are just flat out wrong, contradictory, and morally abominable. Therefore, if we assume that the Bible is from God and we also admit that it contains errors, falsehoods, and moral abominations, then it seems we must understand it as a TEST from God. It is a test to reveal those who love TRUTH and RIGHTEOUSNESS over the false man-made dogmas that say the Bible is the "inerrant and infallible Word of God."

As a confirmation of this view, I note that folks who try to justify everything in the Bible typically show themselves willing to pervert truth, twist words, and and hide facts in a vain effort to accomplish their purpose. In my experience, fundamentalists who adhere to the dogma of an inerrant and infallible Bible are the least likely to admit what it actually states. What could be more ironic? They have failed the test in a most spectacular way.

How's that for a twist?

I don't know if this solution is true. I present it here because it expresses the primary paradox of Biblical fundamentalism which is that those who claim that the Bible is the "inerrant and infallible Word of God" actually have a very low view of Scripture as shown by the fact that they write idiotic defenses of the obvious errors, contradictions, and moral abominations attributed to God. Simply stated, there explanations are not "worthy of God" and so rather than fixing the problem, they make it worse.

Originally Posted by Roberto

I see you always brings this up to see what anwser you get back from us believers of the the stories in the bible. I find it facinating that such a story is there, but we who believes does not do the same and back that up with scripture. And you have to bring up sexy virgins from your filthy guilty mind, as are we all, but good luck defending yourself, rejecting Jesus.

That's not why I bring those things up. They are just the most obvious examples of the reasons I cannot believe the Bible the way you do. And to accuse ME of having a "filthy guilty mind" is utterly absurd. If I had such a mind I would delight in seeing God command such things. The truth is the opposite. The Bible has corrupted YOUR heart and mind so much that you can't even see the moral abominations in the Bible. It has blinded you and made you accept gross immorality attributed to God. This is what Biblical fundamentalism does to believers - it corrupts their minds and their morals.

Originally Posted by Roberto

This is a story we believe is from God, but we don't do the same and back it up with scripture, because we have Jesus in our hearts. But we do believe it' is something God could forsee as a good thing for the future without having to intervine all the time, giving us what we live for, free will.

If Jesus were in your heart you would see the horror of the things the Bible says God did. Can you imagine Jesus commanding the slaughter of every man, woman, and child, except for the 32,000 virgins who were distributed to the merciless soldiers who killed every person they ever loved? This is what amazes me about Biblical fundamentalism. It destroys the normal, healthy moral sense that every person should have.

As for "free will" - if God was interested in that, why is he so hung up on obedience? I don't want to rule over my children. What kind of "free will" is that? I want them to be self-directing, mature, responsible. I don't want a bunch of little robots who are constantly fearful of me if they disobey.

Originally Posted by Roberto

God can forsee everything, the ultimate mathematician. He sees men's future in every action he makes, thats why he could prophecy about Jesus hidden in texts in another stories in the bible, He saw what would happen when Jesus was put in place at the time of the roman empire.

If God is so wise and powerful, why did he choose to emulate a brutal, ignorant, Iron Age tribal war god? Is simply makes no sense at all.

Originally Posted by Roberto

So the sexy virgins became jews, history of the stories in the bible gives us a mind play, and also in the spiritual. You failed by taking just the knowlegde of the letters to proclaim you have a better heart then everybody who don't see this as bad. Your pro-potsmoking alone shows how bad your heart really is of jugding.
And trying to make people have free will again without Jesus. You should know better if you were wise. I think you have smoked up your wiseness.

Why were the virgins saved but not the baby boys? Because the virgins were used to "wives" = sex slaves. We see the same thing in Judges 21 where the Israelites killed every man, woman, and child of Jabeshgilead for the express purpose of kidnapping virgins to be wives:

Judges 21:1 Now the men of Israel had sworn in Mizpeh, saying, There shall not any of us give his daughter unto Benjamin to wife. 2 And the people came to the house of God, and abode there till even before God, and lifted up their voices, and wept sore; 3 And said, O LORD God of Israel, why is this come to pass in Israel, that there should be to day one tribe lacking in Israel? 4 And it came to pass on the morrow, that the people rose early, and built there an altar, and offered burnt offerings and peace offerings. 5 And the children of Israel said, Who is there among all the tribes of Israel that came not up with the congregation unto the LORD? For they had made a great oath concerning him that came not up to the LORD to Mizpeh, saying, He shall surely be put to death. 6 And the children of Israel repented them for Benjamin their brother, and said, There is one tribe cut off from Israel this day. 7 How shall we do for wives for them that remain, seeing we have sworn by the LORD that we will not give them of our daughters to wives? 8 ¶ And they said, What one is there of the tribes of Israel that came not up to Mizpeh to the LORD? And, behold, there came none to the camp from Jabeshgilead to the assembly. 9 For the people were numbered, and, behold, there were none of the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead there. 10 And the congregation sent thither twelve thousand men of the valiantest, and commanded them, saying, Go and smite the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead with the edge of the sword, with the women and the children. 11 And this is the thing that ye shall do, Ye shall utterly destroy every male, and every woman that hath lain by man. 12 And they found among the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead four hundred young virgins, that had known no man by lying with any male: and they brought them unto the camp to Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan.

THEY MURDERED EVERYONE IN THE TOWN SO THEY COULD KIDNAP VIRGINS TO USE AS WIVES! If you don't think this is sick and insane, then you have had your mind corrupted by the Bible. And as for my description of the virgins as "sexy," that did not come from my "filthy guilty mind" but rather from the Most Holy Eternal Law of Almighty God -

Deuteronomy 21:10 When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the LORD thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, 11 And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; 12 Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house; and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; 13 And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife. 14 And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled [fucked] her.

Here we see that God allowed the soldiers to take captive women they find "beautiful" and "desirable" and to use them sexually and toss them out like a dirty rag if they didn't find any "delight" in them. How is it possible that you accept such a perverse law as coming from God? Your heart and mind has been corrupted.

And as an aside: How does my support for cannabis legalization "show how bad my heart really is of judging"? That's absurd. Anyone familiar with the origin of cannabis prohibition (it was based on racism and lies) and the social evils it causes (making criminals of otherwise law abiding citizens, organized crime, huge expenses to arrest, try, and incarcerate users, etc.) could never say that my judgment is simply "bad." They might disagree with my conclusion, but I give solid reasons for it.

Originally Posted by Roberto

Yes, you found the design, but that dosen't mean you own it. Look at Jesus parable where the workers wanted to kill the son of the owner of the field to make it theirs.

I never have, and never would, say it belonged to me.

Originally Posted by Roberto

I remeber about 22, you wrote about bride in hebrew, is "Kallah" the same word is used when Jesus cried "it is finished" at the cross, meaning the finish of us as humans is the marriage between God and men, trough the work of Jesus. It made me like you book so much. But maybe it is good you don't believe in Jesus anymore, so much that you wanted this to be your own finding, putting Jesus so much lower. Maybe if you humble yourself again to see that design you found, is not your own works. And put Jesus in his right place again, maybe then you don't have to defend yourself behind 32,000 sexy virgins.

There you go, like a typical Christian with a corrupt heart accusing me of SIN because I speak the truth! I have absolutely no desire to "make this my own finding." Your accusation is false. It doesn't even make any sense. Just look at my old statements concerning Jesus! here is my testimony about the purpose of my website on the old homepage:

To this end I labour, to glorify the Triune God; to glorify the Father Almighty, Creator of all, to glorify His Son Jesus Christ my Saviour and Hope, and to glorify the Giver of all divine gifts, my Comforter, Guide, Teacher and Friend, God the Holy Spirit. To You be the glory, thrice holy blessed God of Eternity! To You be the glory, now and forevermore. Amen. Amen. Amen.

And here are the thanks I gave to Christ on my old About page:

I remain eternally grateful to my Lord Jesus Christ, the King of the Universe, for shedding His Light upon me and guiding my path – usually without my knowledge – and giving me both the burning desire and the ability to proclaim the neverending wonders of His Holy Word. Oh! The wonders of His Grace! Had He left me to myself, doubtless I’d be dead or wandering aimless and lost through this dark world. Thank you, my Lord!

Your baseless accusations reveal nothing but the filth in your own heart.

Originally Posted by Roberto

You are so smart Richard, you ooze of proudness. No wonder you dont want to believe in Jesus, He would have taken so much of that away from you. Proudness was the fall of satan you know.

You can't refute anything I say with intelligence, so you choose to slander me? Christians like you are the most arrogant, accusatory freaks I've ever encountered. This alone is proof the fundamentalist Christianity is a lie that corrupts both the minds and the morals of believers.


Richard

Hello Richard
I do not want to get involved in discussion again about the “32,000 virgins”. I have explained my understanding of this to you and Rose and the fact that you both dismiss my explanation as excuses and justifications is just denying the fact that you cannot accept a reasonable explanation. From my perspective, this is your problem and from your perspective, you have no problem, so that is just a difference of opinion we have.

I want to pick up on just the two following remarks you have made in your recent post.

If God is so wise and powerful, why did he choose to emulate a brutal, ignorant, Iron Age tribal war god? Is simply makes no sense at all.

God as a “tribal war God” is your words and not as I would describe him, though we are dealing with harsh punishments in which men are used as God’s instruments of punishment. Just as you project onto God your minds image of him, consider that God is using the image men have of Him and living up to their expectation. Before the age of God’s son, God is the Judge and God is the Executioner of His judgment. God judges according to His standards, which are high. He judges according to righteousness by His standards. You might not like the punishment, but you cannot say that man is not guilty of committing evil. Man is the first to blame for being guilty of disobedience. Give me one incident where God has punished men without man first doing something that is evil. We can put men women and children together and just call them a society. If that society commits evil and brings about God’s punishment, then that is the fault of that society. That society as a whole bears the responsibility for their actions. As Judge, God determines the punishment and if that punishment is death, it does not matter how death is brought about.
As Judge, God exercises judgment taking into account His law and other mitigating circumstances. In the case of King David for example, his guilt was offset by his love of God’s law and his heart was right towards God, but he had a moment of aberration in which David’s actions were contrary to what he knew was right. Therefore, God exercised mercy and did not bring the full weight of the law on him, yet God did not spare David the harm that resulted from his actions. Surely, the mercy that God showed, presents him in a different light to the one you always refer to Him as “the warrior God”.

With the advent of God’s son, from that time onwards God is seen as a Heavenly Father. God has now put His Son in charge. God told us to listen to His Son. We do not see God exercising judgment and punishment like that recorded in the OT scriptures. The law of sin and death has not gone away, but the punishment of society has changed. God has left all judgment to His Son and it is Jesus who will judge who lives and who dies and does not enter into the Kingdom of God. God’s anger will be poured out on the nations in future and at this time, God will not use men as His instruments of punishment, but He will use the natural elements.

As for "free will" - if God was interested in that, why is he so hung up on obedience? I don't want to rule over my children. What kind of "free will" is that? I want them to be self-directing, mature, responsible. I don't want a bunch of little robots who are constantly fearful of me if they disobey.

This tells me that you are confusing obedience and free-will. Obedience does not deny free-will. God gives you free-will to choose to be obedient to Him or not. If you have chosen not to be obedient to Him, that has been your choice and free-will. We should love to live according to God's ways for those who do recognize that God's ways will bring peace.

It is good if you do not have to rule over your children, but have you ever not ruled over them? Depending on the nature of children, some parents have an easy time and some parents have had a terrible time controlling their children. Let’s imagine you allow your children do what they want to. At school they become bullies and pick on other children and start to harm other children. What are you going to do? Do you at any time interfere in the conduct of your children and state to them what is acceptable behaviour and what is not? How does one prevent children from continuing their evil actions? I do not see how having ground rules can be avoided. Those ground rules are no different to the ground rules set by God. What if the ground rules continue to be broken, do you just let the children continue to do what they want to do? How do you prevent them from continuing to be evil to other children? I do not see how you cannot lay down ground rules to keep children from doing evil things.
I would like to know how you expect children to be self-directing. There is always and exception but the general nature of man is that he is not able to direct his steps, that is the conclusion brought to us by the prophet Jeremiah. God knows what is in the heart of man and He knows that we are capable of both good and evil and therefore he knows what is best for us. I challenge you to find a better set of rules to govern the way your children should live. How have they got to where they are today? and have they behaved perfectly all of the time?

God does not want us to be a bunch of robots, He has His Angels to do that function (programmed to do His will). It is the free-will of men and women that means they are not robots. God had to allow for the fact that not all humans would do as He wanted them to do. God accepts that some humans (unfortunately too many) are like cracked vessels are no good and therefore God breaks up and are destroyed. All except Jesus have some flaws, but flaws are not the same as a cracked vessel that is not fit for purpose. God wants individuals who are fit for purpose to be in His kingdom.

Those are my thoughts on the two points of discussion.

All the best

David

Originally Posted by David M

Hello Richard
I do not want to get involved in discussion again about the “32,000 virgins”. I have explained my understanding of this to you and Rose and the fact that you both dismiss my explanation as excuses and justifications is just denying the fact that you cannot accept a reasonable explanation. From my perspective, this is your problem and from your perspective, you have no problem, so that is just a difference of opinion we have.

Hey there David,

Rose and I did not "dismiss" your explanations. We explained why they failed. We gave good reasons based on logic and facts that you could not answer. You wrote many long and convoluted explanations but not one of them even approached a legitimate solution. If you disagree, all you need to do is present the essence of your best argument in a few sentences with a link to where you presented it. I did a quick search to make this easy for you. You wrote 29 posts dealing with the 32,000 virgins. Here they are for easy reference so you can find your "reasonable response" that Rose and I should have accepted:

1. Post #40946
2. Post #40982
3. Post #41337
4. Post #41350
5. Post #41868
6. Post #41921
7. Post #41922
8. Post #41939
9. Post #41940
10. Post #41941
11. Post #41955
12. Post #41981
13. Post #41982
14. Post #42016
15. Post #42581
16. Post #42599
17. Post #42609
18. Post #43044
19. Post #43354
20. Post #43392
21. Post #43500
22. Post #46102
23. Post #46140
24. Post #48195
25. Post #48208
26. Post #48292
27. Post #48354
28. Post #48374
29. Post #48375

Rose and I responded to all those posts. Personally, I do not consider this a "matter of opinion." The immorality of kidnapping 32,000 virgins and distributing half of them to the very soldiers who slaughtered every person they ever loved is not open to debate. It is a moral absolute. It is a moral abomination, and if you can't see this then your religion has corrupted your mind and your morals. Consider the irony of this situation. Christianity is supposed to elevate your mind and your morals! But what does it really do?

Originally Posted by David M

I want to pick up on just the two following remarks you have made in your recent post.

God as a “tribal war God” is your words and not as I would describe him, though we are dealing with harsh punishments in which men are used as God’s instruments of punishment. Just as you project onto God your minds image of him, consider that God is using the image men have of Him and living up to their expectation. Before the age of God’s son, God is the Judge and God is the Executioner of His judgment. God judges according to His standards, which are high. He judges according to righteousness by His standards. You might not like the punishment, but you cannot say that man is not guilty of committing evil. Man is the first to blame for being guilty of disobedience. Give me one incident where God has punished men without man first doing something that is evil. We can put men women and children together and just call them a society. If that society commits evil and brings about God’s punishment, then that is the fault of that society. That society as a whole bears the responsibility for their actions. As Judge, God determines the punishment and if that punishment is death, it does not matter how death is brought about.
As Judge, God exercises judgment taking into account His law and other mitigating circumstances. In the case of King David for example, his guilt was offset by his love of God’s law and his heart was right towards God, but he had a moment of aberration in which David’s actions were contrary to what he knew was right. Therefore, God exercised mercy and did not bring the full weight of the law on him, yet God did not spare David the harm that resulted from his actions. Surely, the mercy that God showed, presents him in a different light to the one you always refer to Him as “the warrior God”.

You made quite a series of assertions there my friend. I will deal with them one at a time:

1) God as a “tribal war God” is your words and not as I would describe him

Yes, they are my words, and my words describe the reality, not merely my personal perception. The God described in the Old Testament behaved precisely like any other "tribal war god" of that time. If you disagree, you need to explain what the difference is. You have not done that.

2) we are dealing with harsh punishments in which men are used as God’s instruments of punishment.

That's the problem. God "used" his own people to commit atrocities. Have you taken a moment to consider what such a command does to the human heart and mind? How would you feel if God commanded you to go chop up Muslim women and babies? It would brutalize you. It would totally corrupt your heart and mind. Look at what happens to soldiers in war. They are often destroyed for life. If God wanted the Canaanites destroyed, he could have done it himself and spared his people from the trauma of slaughtering women and children with swords. If he had done that, I wouldn't have as much of a problem with it because you could argue that God is free to execute judgment, like in the flood (though there are moral problems there too, but they are not nearly as pronounced as in this case).

3) Just as you project onto God your minds image of him

I am not "projecting" my image of God on the God of the Bible. I am responding to the horrific image of God presented by the Bible.

4) consider that God is using the image men have of Him and living up to their expectation

Why would God "live up to" a false image that people might have of him? That makes no sense at all. God is supposed to be God. If he lived up to my image of him, he would never commit the atrocities attributed to him in the Bible.

5) Before the age of God’s son, God is the Judge and God is the Executioner of His judgment.

That's the problem - God did not execute any judgment, but rather commanded his people to do it for him and thereby he totally corrupted their hearts and minds. That's what chopping up thousands of women and children does to people.

6) God judges according to His standards, which are high. He judges according to righteousness by His standards.

How can you say such things in light of what the Bible actually says? The standards God displayed are the worst ever seen! They are as bad as Hitler. We're talking about the slaughter of babies and the kidnapping of 32,000 virgins and the distribution of them to the very soldiers who murdered every person they ever loved. You call such things a "high standard" and "righteous"? That's insane. It destroys all meaning of words.

7) You might not like the punishment, but you cannot say that man is not guilty of committing evil.

In all our many discussions, I have never written a word against the concept of "God judging sin." But we are not talking about "God" judging sin, but rather God commanding sin! And I never said that man is not guilty of committing evil. The problem is that the God of the Bible looks like the apotheosis of man's sin.

8) In the case of King David for example, his guilt was offset by his love of God’s law and his heart was right towards God

You shouldn't bring up King David because that's another example of God as an unjust judge. God killed David's son because of David's sin, but did not punish David according to the law. That's a double injustice.

9) Therefore, God exercised mercy and did not bring the full weight of the law on him

Such "mercy" is fundamentally UNJUST. Just ask Uriah. How would you feel if someone stole your wife and killed you, and then the judge didn't execute the proper judgment according to law? The Bible is filled with false justice called "mercy" but God doesn't give it out freely to all. So anyone who suffers under the law has a legitimate grievance against God who let his favored people literally get away with adultery and murder. Just ask the family of the guy God killed because he picked up some sticks on the sabbath. You call the Bible just? It looks totally insane to me.

Originally Posted by David M

With the advent of God’s son, from that time onwards God is seen as a Heavenly Father. God has now put His Son in charge. God told us to listen to His Son. We do not see God exercising judgment and punishment like that recorded in the OT scriptures. The law of sin and death has not gone away, but the punishment of society has changed. God has left all judgment to His Son and it is Jesus who will judge who lives and who dies and does not enter into the Kingdom of God. God’s anger will be poured out on the nations in future and at this time, God will not use men as His instruments of punishment, but He will use the natural elements.

We don't "see" God doing anything! And the reason is obvious. The Bible stories are just that - stories. Fables. Myths. God doesn't "do" anything.

And your theory doesn't work because God continued to "do" things in the NT after the Son came. So why not now? Because now we have video cameras.

I very much respect your perseverance my friend, but you would do much better if you shortened you arguments and based them on things that I am compelled to agree to, such as logic and facts.

All the very best,

Richard

Hello Richard

Thank you for your equally long reply to every point I made. I am going to leave it to others to follow up the posts you have listed and they can read the replies.

I very much respect your perseverance my friend, but you would do much better if you shortened you arguments and based them on things that I am compelled to agree to, such as logic and facts.

Thank you for your respect, it is a challenge we both have for we know that we disagree on virtually every doctrine of the Bible, but it is important for others to see both sides of the argument and why we hold the views we do.

My replies/posts have been long, but I felt that it was necessary to give a full explanation. It is easy to make a soundbite but an answer cannot be given is such few words. I often feel that some of mu comments I expected you to respond to were not and therefore I am not certain you fully had taken in what I was trying to explain to you. It is a matter of perception and we have different perceptions.

I admire your own persistence in refuting my arguments, and the fact that you know your way round this forum and can find past posts so quickly and from other sources as well.

Just as it is possible to make soundbites by way of challenging statements which cannot be answered in a few words, so it is like a conclusion that can be summed up in few words. It takes many words before that short conclusion can be derived. Even taking one point at a time by making it the subject of a separate thread, will I fear result in long explanations.

Not to reply to anything you have written (which has not been said before) Let's deal with point #2

2) we are dealing with harsh punishments in which men are used as God’s instruments of punishment.

That's the problem. God "used" his own people to commit atrocities. Have you taken a moment to consider what such a command does to the human heart and mind? How would you feel if God commanded you to go chop up Muslim women and babies? It would brutalize you. It would totally corrupt your heart and mind. Look at what happens to soldiers in war. They are often destroyed for life. If God wanted the Canaanites destroyed, he could have done it himself and spared his people from the trauma of slaughtering women and children with swords. If he had done that, I wouldn't have as much of a problem with it because you could argue that God is free to execute judgment, like in the flood (though there are moral problems there too, but they are not nearly as pronounced as in this case).

#2 is the fact that we are dealing with and now you are introducing emotive issues. Dealing with these briefly is difficult but I will stay limited.
I admit I am squeamish. If I had to kill animals for meat or for their skins, I would probably be a vegetarian. For the same reason of being squeamish, I could not be a surgeon. However, as it is with phobias, people can be made to get over them.

We know that men are affected by battles and what they witness, but before suffering the consequences, many of those soldiers went to war willingly believing they were fighting for God and country.
We do not
God said that He would go before Israel to fight for them (Deuteronomy 1:30), thus the amount of conflict the soldiers were put to might not have been as great as supposed. The culture of those times was different to today, yet human nature is the same and there are those in our armies that would not think twice about going and killing the enemy by shooting them this is no different to killing by the sword.
God's people were held guiltless for following the commands of God (Numbers 32:22) The Israelite soldiers had nothing to feel guilty about. The soldiers were guilty where they did not follow God's instructions to the letter.

If God had done everything Himself, the people would not have shown their obedience or lack of obedience. This is at the heart of all the problems beginning at Adam and Eve.

God did kill armies not involving the armies of Israel, so what you are saying God could have done, He demonstrated this elsewhere so we have to ask and answer the question, why did God do it this way.

I look forward (when you have time) to your exposition on sin and how you would solve the problem. In the meantime, men and women sin and have to bear the consequences of their actions whether those consequences come from the reaction of men and women or from God. God has given believers and those who work at being faithful and obedient to His ways, a way of escaping eternal death. This outlines the frame we are in whether we like it or not.

All the best

David

Originally Posted by David M

Hello Richard

Thank you for your equally long reply to every point I made. I am going to leave it to others to follow up the posts you have listed and they can read the replies.

Hey there David,

Well, one long reply generally requires another. That's why I encourage you to state your point with brevity and clarity so we can clearly see its merits.

Case in point: If you had ever really done what you said you should have been able to answer my request that you state your case in a few sentences and then put a link to where you explained yourself more fully. It seems to me that the reason you can't do this is because you have never successfully made your case. And that's why it's so frustrating when you constantly make false assertions about how I simply "dismissed" your explanations. I've never done that David. I always give you good reasons based on logic and facts. I respond to what you actually say and tell you why I don't find it convincing.

Originally Posted by David M

Thank you for your respect, it is a challenge we both have for we know that we disagree on virtually every doctrine of the Bible, but it is important for others to see both sides of the argument and why we hold the views we do.

Actually, we don't "disagree on virtually every doctrine of the Bible." We agree completely that the Bible teaches that Jesus is the Son of God, that he was crucified and resurrected, etc. The primary difference is that you believe what the Bible teaches. There are two main disagreements about what the Bible teaches: 1) I believe it clearly teaches that angels can sin (since it explicitly says so). 2) I believe that the Trinity is a better fit to the Biblical data than your doctrine that Jesus was a created being. 3) I don't believe that there are any prophecies fulfilled with sufficient clarity to be proved. 4) I believe the Bible contains errors, contradictions, and moral abominations attributed to God. Most of our disagreements have been about those four topics.

Originally Posted by David M

My replies/posts have been long, but I felt that it was necessary to give a full explanation. It is easy to make a soundbite but an answer cannot be given is such few words. I often feel that some of mu comments I expected you to respond to were not and therefore I am not certain you fully had taken in what I was trying to explain to you. It is a matter of perception and we have different perceptions.

Yes, we both know that any reasonably complete answer will contain many words if we want to address all the relevant issues. But that doesn't mean that you can't state your conclusion in a brief paragraph, just like the abstract at the beginning of a long detailed scientific paper. If you can't do that, then you can't claim to have an argument at all.

Originally Posted by David M

I admire your own persistence in refuting my arguments, and the fact that you know your way round this forum and can find past posts so quickly and from other sources as well.

Ah, well I do have an advantage because I have direct access to the forum database. All I had to do was write one line of SQL code and it instantly returned your 29 posts as html links:

Code:

select cast(concat('<a href="http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?',threadid,'&p=',postid,'#post',postid,'">Post #',postid,'</a>') as char(10000)) from vbpost where pagetext like '%32,000%' and username='David M';

It only took a minute.

Originally Posted by David M

Just as it is possible to make soundbites by way of challenging statements which cannot be answered in a few words, so it is like a conclusion that can be summed up in few words. It takes many words before that short conclusion can be derived. Even taking one point at a time by making it the subject of a separate thread, will I fear result in long explanations.

That's right - it may take many words to justify your conclusion, but you still must be able to state your conclusion in a few sentences or something is wrong with it.

Here's the thing: If you state your conclusion briefly there is no cloud of words to hide behind. That's why it's so valuable in our search for clarity, reality, and truth.

Originally Posted by David M

Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough

That's the problem. God "used" his own people to commit atrocities. Have you taken a moment to consider what such a command does to the human heart and mind? How would you feel if God commanded you to go chop up Muslim women and babies? It would brutalize you. It would totally corrupt your heart and mind. Look at what happens to soldiers in war. They are often destroyed for life. If God wanted the Canaanites destroyed, he could have done it himself and spared his people from the trauma of slaughtering women and children with swords. If he had done that, I wouldn't have as much of a problem with it because you could argue that God is free to execute judgment, like in the flood (though there are moral problems there too, but they are not nearly as pronounced as in this case).

#2 is the fact that we are dealing with and now you are introducing emotive issues. Dealing with these briefly is difficult but I will stay limited.
I admit I am squeamish. If I had to kill animals for meat or for their skins, I would probably be a vegetarian. For the same reason of being squeamish, I could not be a surgeon. However, as it is with phobias, people can be made to get over them.

We know that men are affected by battles and what they witness, but before suffering the consequences, many of those soldiers went to war willingly believing they were fighting for God and country.
We do not
God said that He would go before Israel to fight for them (Deuteronomy 1:30), thus the amount of conflict the soldiers were put to might not have been as great as supposed. The culture of those times was different to today, yet human nature is the same and there are those in our armies that would not think twice about going and killing the enemy by shooting them this is no different to killing by the sword.
God's people were held guiltless for following the commands of God (Numbers 32:22) The Israelite soldiers had nothing to feel guilty about. The soldiers were guilty where they did not follow God's instructions to the letter.

So the only reason you don't like chopping up women and children with swords because you are "squeamish"? Your answer indicates a total lack of moral understanding. Your conscience seems to be seared with a hot iron. Where is your heart of humanity? Where is you compassion? The issue has nothing to do with being squeamish about blood and guts. The issue is the absolute moral abomination of genocide and slaughtering women and children and kidnapping virgins to be used as "wives" by the very soldiers who killed every person they ever loved. I've explained this dozens of times to you, but your moral sense appears to be utterly dead. Your mind is so trapped by your assumption of the truth of everything the Bible says about God that you can't even see that chopping up babies presents a moral problem! I am stunned. Utterly stunned. Especially since I have presented these facts to you dozens of times and you don't even respond to them.

The mere fact that the Bible says the people were guiltless for slaughtering women and children does not make it so.

Originally Posted by David M

If God had done everything Himself, the people would not have shown their obedience or lack of obedience. This is at the heart of all the problems beginning at Adam and Eve.

There are better ways for people to show obedience. For example, they should show obedience to the commands to be kind, caring, and merciful.

It is immoral to obey immoral commands. Your answer expresses the fundamental moral flaw of Christianity that teaches "obedience for the sake of obedience." That's what dictators like Hitler teach. That's why it's in the Bible. The MEN who made up the Bible were who the people were told to obey. Sure, the MEN said "God said it" but in reality, it was MEN who were demanding obedience to their immoral commands. How ironic that now, 3000 years later, you are defending the commands of immoral dictators without showing the slightest hint of any awareness that such commands are morally abominable.

Originally Posted by David M

I look forward (when you have time) to your exposition on sin and how you would solve the problem. In the meantime, men and women sin and have to bear the consequences of their actions whether those consequences come from the reaction of men and women or from God. God has given believers and those who work at being faithful and obedient to His ways, a way of escaping eternal death. This outlines the frame we are in whether we like it or not.

You don't have to wait. My exposition on sin is quite succinct. I never use that word and so have nothing to say about it. It does not reality to anything in reality that I know of. If you want to speak of immoral actions, then use that word. The word sin is too specific to Christianity and carries too much baggage to be useful. I never use the concept in any explanation about anything in reality.

Your idea that the Bible teaches us something we need to know to avoid "eternal death" is pure speculation and I have absolutely no reason to believe it. And if it is true, then what about all the people that never heard of the Bible? And what about all the people that have heard a false version (which you say are the vast majority of Christians)? If we need the Bible to find the way to avoid eternal death, then God doesn't care at all about the vast majority of people because he produced a book that is so self-contradictory that the vast majority of those who believe it, according to you, have got it totally wrong. So what's the point?

All the best,

Richard

Originally Posted by lovesick worshipper

Hey Richard, I was really excited to find your website and was looking forward to being enlightened on certain truths. But it made me very sad when I continued to read and found how you took back your faith in Jesus. I still think your findings on the Bible wheel are very valuable. It's just like non-bieliving scientists studying nature though not believing in its Creator. Every book has an author. And I wonder, if you being such an intellectually gifted individual have missed out on a great relationship with the God and the Man from the Bible just because of a few disagreements here and there. I suggest you don't give up dialoguing with your Old Friend. And perhaps in due time He will answer your questions and concerns...on His terms, however. After all, He is God and we are His creatures. He is the Potter and we the clay ; ) Best wishes!

PS. I sense you have a beautiful, compassionate heart and a lot of what you carry and pulls your faith down is not your own burden but another's. Don't miss out on what He may have for you because of another's "right gone wrong", dimming faith etc.. Every man's journey is their own. Also, the proof that the Bible is the Word of God is not only its internal evidence, (ex. 300+ Messianic prophecies being fulfilled in one man- Jesus of Nazareth, probability being 300 million to the 23rd power+), external (J.C.'s resurrection) but also the fruit, the evidence of character transformation by close association, friendship with God. No amount of rationalization can provoke character transformation. This is a process based on relationship and time-lapse alone, which is why God brought about the Torah, The Gospels, the Bible etc. int he first place. Talk to the Man!!! lol!!! We complicate it don't we? It's mostly because of pride. But no worries, God is very secure in His identity. And just wants His children back.

PSS. As far as your Biblical arguments go... I'm not the best Bible scholar out there, though I remember being part of a few discussions on such topics. Like I said, God is very secure in His identity so I'm not even going to attempt to defend Him poorly.

Best wishes, really! I can feel Your Father loves you very much!! I'll be keeping you in prayer...in my own dialogue with God ; )

Hey there lovesick worshipper,

Thanks for your kind comments. There is no need for sorrow - I am the same person I've always been. And as you noted, the evidence supporting the Bible Wheel remains as valid as ever. This is a great mystery to me, but it is not sufficient to make me believe the traditional doctrines about God. The problem is not "a few disagreements here and there" - the problem is that the entire message is unbelievable to me. The true God cannot be the God described in the Bible who commands genocide, slavery, sexism, the taking of 32,000 virgins in war, etc. All the answers given by Christian apologists are worse than wrong because they universally display a profound disdain for the truth. For example, you mentioned "rationalization" - that's the problem. Take a look at my article called The Art of Rationalization: A Case Study of Christian Apologist Rich Deem in which I show how his commitment to falsehood causes him to totally disintegrate science, the Bible, morality, logic and ultimately his own mind. This is typical of my experience with all Christian apologists. That's why I know there can be no "apologetic solution" to the problems that led me to reject traditional Christianity. Simply stated, it is demonstrably wrong, and worse, attempts to defend it tend to corrupt both the minds and the morals of the believers.

As for the prophecies as proof of the Bible - that won't help for two reasons. First, I don't need more proof since the Bible Wheel is far and away the strongest proof for the divine inspiration of the Bible that I have ever seen. Second, the prophecies are not proof at all because most of them are not objectively verifiable. For example, the fulfillment of the "prophecy" that Christ would be born in Bethlehem has two problems. First, it is not explicitly stated as a prophecy of the Messiah, and second, the fulfillment looks like it was made up after the fact. I say this because Luke said that Joseph and Mary lived in Nazareth, not Bethlehem, whereas Matthew says they lived in Bethlehem. And this brings up another host of problems because the birth narratives in Matthew and Luke are contradictory and cannot be reconciled. And on and on it goes - it is simply impossible for a rational person committed to truth to believe the Bible is an accurate record. Your suggestion that we could calculate a mathematical probability of "300 million to the 23rd power+" shows that you have been lied to by professional Christian apologists. No one seriously committed to the truth could make such absurd calculations. It would be impossible for me to believe them no matter how strongly I desired to because I know they are false and can see their errors. Yet they are common amongst the most famous Christian apologists such as Hugh Ross who asserts that there are over 2000 prophecies that have been fulfilled perfectly, with no error. I consider his claims to be grossly irrational and truly deluded. And yet he is one of the "best" of all Christian apologists! Another example is William Lane Craig. He justifies the genocide by saying that God did no wrong ordering the slaughter of children because they all go to heaven. That's ridiculous because it implies that abortionists do no wrong - on the contrary, abortionists are the greatest saints because they saved all those babies who would have grown to be unrepentant sinners from suffering eternal torment in hell. As you can see, it's all madness. Pure madness.

I know you don't feel qualified to argue these points. But then I must ask, why do you feel qualified to believe things you can't defend? Mere personal experience is not a good reason at all because you personal experience cannot answer these points. In reality, you are believing what you have been told by authorities who cannot justify their assertions. I think that is a grave error.

In any case, thanks again for your kind comments. I'm sorry my changes have made you sad, but I remain committed to the truth so if I have erred in anything I welcome correction from you.

All the very best,

Richard

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Too much study has made the mad!!!!

It is an old adage that too much study makes one mad. Indeed, it is in the Bible:

Acts 26:24 And as he thus spake for himself, Festus said with a loud voice, Paul, thou art beside thyself; much learning doth make thee mad.

But there are two problems with your comment. 1) You did not refer to anyone or anything that you think is "mad" because of too much study, and 2) You offer no alternative. Are you saying that the endless Bible study conducted by countless Christians over the millennia explains why they are so often nuts?

Personally, I think once one has begun to eat of the "tree of knowledge" there is no going back. The only way out is to eat your way through. The Jews have an old tradition that says the same thing.

Originally Posted by cm123

I read through your replies to others for this article and I see a general theme developing: it seems you take issue with God's lack of morality. As quoted above from one of your replies, you consider "morality" to be an absolute and you in turn hold God to that absolute, and subsequently, because the representation of him in the bible stories does not live up to that absolute morality, then he is discarded (or, at least, the stories of him are discarded). My questions are:

1. What is your measure used in determining if God has met the "absolute" moral standard? Basically, how are you determining what this "absolute" morality actually is? Does it come from a universal human idea of morality (example: no one should kill children - of which we know has never been universally held worldwide) or does it come from the assimilation of religious morality across all religious thinking, or is it a personal objection you have that God (or the stories of him) have somehow violated your own personal moral code?

Hello cm123,

I would like to share with you the method I used (when I was a Christian) to determine the immoral nature of many of god's actions in the Bible. If one is to believe that they have been created by god, then one must believe that their ability to reason was also given them by god. That being the case I used my reason to determine that the Bible could not be an accurate portrayal of a moral, just, and righteous god, because over and over again the Biblegod acts in an immoral, unjust, and unrighteous manner. My innate standard of morality is far higher than that of Yahweh, so it stands to reason my morality could not have originated with him. Just because primitive men penned words that say Yahweh is god, does not make it so.

What is your reason for choosing to believe what the Bible says about god, and why do you believe the Bibles portrayal of what god is like over that of some other sacred text? Did you use your ability to reason to make a choice?


All the best,
Rose

Originally Posted by cm123

Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough

The immorality of kidnapping 32,000 virgins and distributing half of them to the very soldiers who slaughtered every person they ever loved is not open to debate. It is a moral absolute. It is a moral abomination, and if you can't see this then your religion has corrupted your mind and your morals...

I read through your replies to others for this article and I see a general theme developing: it seems you take issue with God's lack of morality. As quoted above from one of your replies, you consider "morality" to be an absolute and you in turn hold God to that absolute, and subsequently, because the representation of him in the bible stories does not live up to that absolute morality, then he is discarded (or, at least, the stories of him are discarded). My questions are:

1. What is your measure used in determining if God has met the "absolute" moral standard? Basically, how are you determining what this "absolute" morality actually is? Does it come from a universal human idea of morality (example: no one should kill children - of which we know has never been universally held worldwide) or does it come from the assimilation of religious morality across all religious thinking, or is it a personal objection you have that God (or the stories of him) have somehow violated your own personal moral code?

Excellent questions! Very well formulated and precise.

I believe that moral judgments are objectively true or false. I outline why in my article The Logic of Love: A Natural Theory of Morality. It is an objective, axiomatic, naturalistic moral theory based on two axioms and two primitive concepts, self and love. Love is the root of our moral intuitions. People with absolutely no love will have no moral sense, which is why we call them "inhuman." Morality is fundamentally ontological. It is based on what it means for something to be, to exist. As a first approximation, something is judged to be evil if it threatens the integrity of being and something is judged to be good if it enhances the integrity of being. It is grounded in self-love because it is axiomatic that self loves self since every organism must have an instinct for self-preservation. In humans, with our big brains, this manifests in the fullness of self-love such as that described by Paul "For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it" (Eph 5:29), and in reflective love which is based on a recognition of ontological unity of self and other:

1. Self Love: This is the axiom that Self loves Self because Self is one by definition. A self naturally desires its own well-being. For a self to exist, it must be a unified integrated whole.
2. Reflective Love: Self recognizes Other as a self of the same ontological nature, and so recognizes the ontological unity of Self and Other. Love is the unity of Self and Other. Self-love is reconciled with reflective love through the logic of the Golden Rule. This is the principle of moral symmetry, fairness, justice. All moral statements must be symmetric under an interchange of person A and person B.

Morality is fundamentally ontological. It is based on the concept of integrity of being. This is why the word "integrity" means both "to be whole, complete" and "to be morally upright." The concepts are unified. Note also that integrity of being is an objective concept.

This how I judge if the actions attributed to God in the Bible are moral or not. I hold him to the same standards as any moral agent.

Originally Posted by cm123

2. I've seen it hinted at, and I've searched the forums, but I have not found a direct response from you on the discussion Paul has in Romans 9 concerning the potter and the clay. It seems to me that your objection is, when boiled down, you (the clay) questioning God (the potter), is it not? You're basically accusing God of immorality, which would basically be what Paul calls "unrighteousness with God" (Rom 9:14). Paul says no way and quotes God, "I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy..." The idea that God only does good things is preposterous since we know from Rom 9:17 that it was God who raised up Pharaoh simply as an advertising campaign to "make [his] name known throughout the earth." Imagine all the brutality that was done by Pharaoh during his years as "a god" before God destroyed him. This seems horribly immoral on God's part, doesn't it? Yet, Paul answers that accusation in Rom 9:20, "...who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, 'Why have you made me like this?' Does not the potter how power over the clay?" In the end, it all goes back to God displaying his power, his name, his glory to the world, right? More importantly, isn't there but one judge? Doesn't it stand to reason that God, the creator, would be outside of the moral code he placed over us/in us? Just because you or I might not necessarily "agree" with something God does, does it make it any less righteous? Isn't everything he does righteous? Isn't the fact that he is the one who has done/is doing it define it as righteous? Certainly, at judgment day, there will be few if any goats who will say, "Yeah, I did that, I was bad, I deserve the lake of fire, lets get on with it." And I'm certain those who will be thrown in the lake of fire will not agree with God's judgment (Satan certainly hasn't yet and the lake of fire was actually made for him). Isn't the reality, though, at the end of the day, God's judgment is the only absolute?

God destroyed all life on earth with the flood (except for those in the ark). Was this a righteous/moral act? God (the father) sent Jesus to earth to be crucified for all of us. Was this moral and just? In light of Romans 9, are we, as the creation, even in a position where we can question God in the issue of what he does or doesn't do? Are we even capable as created beings to correctly judge/determine/conclude what is "moral" beyond what God has instructed us in the bible? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but does the bible anywhere say that God is bound by anything, especially by the laws of the bible given to the Jews for his creation? As I understand it, God's pretty much a "do whatever he sees fit" kind of entity and the very fact that he did it or didn't do it, by necessity, makes it right, correct, moral, and righteous. If God decides at Judgment day, after all was said and done, "Nope, I'm changing my mind. Off with all their heads," and proceeds to throw the unrighteous and righteous together into the lake of fire, burns everything up, destroys the angels - basically, just goes on a fundamentalist fire sale with everything he made in Genesis - wouldn't he be justified in doing that? Is God really bound by any kind of moral code beyond what his own will chooses to do at any given moment? It doesn't mean we or anything else in creation can do the same thing and it be righteous (as illustrated in Lucifer's fall), so just because God may have done it doesn't give us license to do likewise. There is a reason, I think, why he is called the Father and we are called his children. More poignantly, sheep. This is a better perspective of our situation to God, as we are most certainly not on equal footing with him.

I do not offer this as a means of repudiating your beliefs, or trying to defend mine. It just seems a plausible argument to me in light of Rom 9 and came to mind as I read your responses. Your insight would be greatly appreciated.

cm

Fascinating comments. I agree that if God is "outside our moral code" and is "free to do whatever he wants" then it would be impossible to say that he is immoral or unrighteous. But by the same token, it would be impossible to say that he is good or righteous. Your solution renders the Bible empty and void of all meaning. If we cannot judge God in any way at all, we cannot say that he is good or bad for both are judgments.

Where do you get the idea that God's actions define righteousness? What could that even mean? That's backwards and totally meaningless. If it were true, then we wouldn't think that genocide or the taking of the 32,000 virgins was wrong. If we did not already have a concept of righteousness based on human language, then the word would have no meaning when used in the Bible. The concept must be definable using normal human language and experience or it will have no meaning at all. This is one of the reason I reject Christianity - it empties many words of their meaning. For example, God is called "trustworthy" when in fact he cannot be actually trusted to do anything for anyone in this life. Think about it. I trust millions of people every day to grow and pack my food without poisoning it, to give me gasoline instead of acid that would destroy the tank, to give me medicine instead of poison when I'm sick, and so forth. So the word "trustworthy" has real meaning in human language. We use it all the time and we know exactly what we mean. But that meaning is utterly lost when applied to God. Yet Christians insist absolutely that God is trustworthy and exhort people to pray despite the fact that God can never be actually trusted to answer any prayer.

There is much more to say, but I'll toss the ball back into your court for now.

Thanks for taking time to share you insights.

All the best,

Richard

Originally Posted by cm123

Hi Rose,

Thanks for responding to my questions.



It is a true statement that humans were created by God (in that the bible claims this). Likewise, it is true that the human ability to reason was also given by God. The problem, though, is I think you are missing a key component of the equation. The one you seem to have skipped is the effect the Fall of Adam and Eve had on our reasoning abilities. It is possible that we never had the same reasoning capacity as God (even pre-fall), though it is at least alluded to in 1 Corinthians 13:12 that we may one day be on a level playing field. But, for now, while we are subject to the futility of the curse, God says, "...as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thouhts than your thoughts..." (Isaiah 55:8-9). If we accept this (of course, by faith), then it would be impossible for us to make the comparison between our reasoning ability concerning what is moral or immoral and what God determines to be moral or immoral (at least, for him, since we know what his thoughts are for us). The Jews were given the written Law to try and encode a moral compass in them, and the new covenant was provided the Holy Spirit to be our teacher in all moral issues. In the end (Revelation 20:11-14), though, we will all stand before the Great White Throne and be judged according to what is written in the books, judged by none other than God and his moral standard (not our fallen standard of Him). In fact, God has never been, is not now, nor ever will be "on trial," especially by His own creation (Romans 9:20ff).

Hi CM,
Since you gave quite a long response I am going to just pick out the relevant points and respond to them. The fall of Adam and Eve would have no affect on our reasoning abilities, what was immoral or unjust before the fall would remain immoral and unjust after the fall. According to the Bible, disobedience was the reason for the fall, Adam and Eve did not commit immoral acts they merely wanted to be wise like Yahweh. There is nothing in the Garden story that would lead one to believe that Adam and Eve lost their ability to reason or that Yahweh changed the meaning of what is moral. What we see throughout the Bible is one standard of morality applying to Yahweh and another standard applying to humans. Also, humans can commit immoral acts if Yahweh commands them to otherwise they are punished. There is no consistency in the Bible, which is a sure sign that it was written from the minds of men.

Originally Posted by cm123

I think a good example is the child who is given a bedtime by his parent. This child must abide by the bedtime, no matter what the reason is behind it. If he is caught up after his bedtime, he will be punished. But, what if the child, who keeps his bedtime perfectly, witnesses his parent up past the perscribed bedtime? What if the child then calls out the parent, claiming the parent is hypocritcal for making the child go to bed, while the parent can do whatever he wishes. Of course, we can easily see the fallacy in the child's rationale here, even if the child cannot. There are certainly many reasons why the parent might prescribe the bedtime. It might be because the child must get up early for school the next day. It might be because a growing child needs more sleep than an average adult. It might be that the parent would normally go to bed, but must stay up late to finish a project for work the next day. It even might be because the child is being annoying and the parent wants a break! We can quibble over all these and the myriad of other reasons, if they are right or not. But, the fact is, the child must simply obey, and the parent is at liberty to go to bed whenever he wants. Why? The parent is not only the creator of the bedtime (which was originally set for the child alone), but he is also the creator of the very child! And we have a promise in the bible that everything God does is for our benefit (Romans 8:28ff). Absolutely, there are many examples that would then confound us - how what God does benefits us - but we must trust and exercise faith that God, as the Father, does know best (I think there will come a day when we will understand all these things).

The example you gave has nothing to do with the immorality displayed by Yahweh in Scripture. A better example would be if a parent told their child not to abuse others or steal from them, yet the child sees his parent doing that very thing. It is one thing to keep our children from doing things that they are not mature enough to understand, but quite another to commit immoral acts in their presence or force them to commit immoral acts.

Originally Posted by cm123

I don't presume to understand why everything happens the way it does. Evil is the innate nature of our world, of our reality. Everything we know, see, hear, taste, touch, understand - it is all only a shadow of what God knows - and we preceive everything through a haze of the curse. Even our own history on earth is shrouded in a mirky mire, making it nearly impossible to know what "truth" is. We now live in a world where human knowledge demands no "absolutes." Your innate standard of morality may indeed appear to be higher than Gods, but all the evidence is not yet in, and appearances can be deceiving. If you are claiming objectivity, I would caution you. We don't know with certainty what was happening behind the scenes in any of the bible accounts. We don't even have the whole script of what was happening on the stage! I would say not one account in the bible could be considered a historical record of events, at least, not as we would define it today. The bible was never intended to be. Rather, it is a supernaturally inspired collection of documents, intended to spark faith for believers and to be a stumbling block for unbelievers. I think Gamaliel said it best, "...if it is of God, you cannot overthrow it--lest you even be found to fight against God." (Acts 5:39). We do not know, "...the end from the beginning.." (Isaiah 46:10). Our reasoning will only take us so far, and if we do not have this foundation, "..the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge..." (Proverbs 1:7), then we will, "...always be learning [but] never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." (2 Timothy 3:7).

All the evidence I need to show the Bible is a man made book is contained within its pages. If you study the Bible using your logic and reasoning you will find that it is an extremely male biased book, that in and of itself is all that is necessary to invalidate it contents as being divinely given. No moral or just god can be biased and still be called righteous and trustworthy. Here is a link to an article I wrote called The Male Bias of the Bible.

Originally Posted by cm123

I can unanimously state the origin of my acceptance has nothing to do with reason. In fact, it is the opposite of reason. Before I believed the message of the bible, I was a practicing Buddhist. Before that, a theistic Satanist. I was raised by my parents informally as a secularist (in that we had no religious training whatsoever in the home as children). I was a happy and content Zen Buddhist when I had a non-charasmatic experience with what I consider to be God re-adjusting my life choices in a new direction. It was simply a matter of placing me in a situation where I was alone with a bible, in a circumstance where I was moved to read from the bible to pass the time. For various reasons, I could not look through the table of contents, but had to just flip to a spot and start reading. I remember flipping to 2 Peter 2, and the impact of reading this chapter (or parts of it) transformed my life instantly and profoundly. I could no longer sit in meditation. I immediately had a testimony of conversion and professed it to my Buddhist peers (who were non too happy about it). This transformation was not sought after, was not enticed by a would-be preacher/evangelist/pastor/teacher, nor was my life in a "shambles" or in "dire straights" where I was seeking out an emotional fix or solution. I was actually very happy and content as a Buddhist, and, for several months afterward, I tried to return to my sitting practices to no avail. Even now, 17 years later, I still am unable to shake the transformational faith that sprang up within me from reading that single chapter.

Now, my reasoning does come into play later on, as I (or God) laid a foundation in me through systematically reading and studying the bible. I would be the first to say there are "problems" with the text, as many have been pointed out. While I do try very hard not to turn a blind eye to these, I still reserve final judgment to the wisdom of God, who I believe (yes, irrationally) will rectify all these supposed problems at Judgment Day.

As for why I have chosen the bible over other sacred texts, I would say that I have not chosen it. I am convinced that I was, before my transformation experience, what Paul called "a free man" and, being chosen by Christ, I have become Christ's slave. It was not a personal choice I made based on logic, reason, or even emotive conditioning. It was a process of "hearing the word" and responding to it. How this process actually works (as to the specific mechanisms), I am utterly unsure. I simply ascribe Paul's description that the Word is "spiritually discerned." I don't choose a different text because the bible is the only one intrinsically tied to that life-altering experience. I often say, I don't choose to believe, but I can't help but believe.

cm

When I became a Christian it also had nothing to do with reasoning, it wasn't until I began to use my reason to ask questions about my faith that the integrity of the Bible and its god began to crumble. I challenge you to put aside your subjective feelings for a moment and try to resolve the many immoralities attributed to god in Scripture, without justifying them by saying "God's ways are higher than our ways".

Take care,
Rose