Morality of God

[Darnoc]

Yes, it is about the morality, Theta. Thanks for giving me a push back in the right direction.

 

Well, keeping in mind what I said about god's plan (because god knows every variable he could plan everything in this universe before he created it and it happens the way he planned it), our universe is defined by rules, laws and variables created by god. If god is moral, he will not break these rules and laws and he will not alter any variables against those rules or laws. If he is immoral, he has created a chaotic universe which lacks any rules or when they exist he breaks them all the time in order to achieve what he wants. So we must search for the following:

 

- Did god create this universe with a plan, did he invent rules and laws which do determine this universe? With other words: Did god create a chaotic or an orderly universe?

 

- If god did create an orderly universe, does he act by these rules he created and does he not violate them?

 

I think the first question can be answered quickly. There are many passages in the bible which indicate that god did create this universe with a plan in mind and that he created rules and laws how this universe functions.

The second question is much more difficult to answer: Did god ever violate his own laws or rules? Because god created us with a plan in mind and made rules for us to function, every law and rule we invent must have its source in him. So we can therefore jugde god by our own laws, because our laws and moralities are in the end his laws and moralities(because he created them). So, did god ever break the law?

The basic laws of god are of course the ten commandements. I will now look at them and then try to find out if god ever broke these laws he created. I know also that there are some who think that those laws aren't just and moral in themselves. So I will first clear this matter: Are the ten commandements just and moral?

 

First Commandement: You shall not have any other gods beside me.

 

Some said that this law isn't just because you can't punish someone for believing something else (assuming that god exists and that the bible is right, something wrong). You should keep in mind that these laws were created for the Hebrews (and for all the people believing in god). The Hebrews knew that god existed and that what he said was true and that he was the only god. So when you know and don't act by your knowlegde, then it is a crime. When you know that you shouldn't steal and you steal, it is a crime. When you know that only one god exists and that you should only worship him, then it is a crime. If you don't know then you can't be hold responsible, at least not in the amount as someone who knew and acted against this knowlegde.

 

Second Commandement: You shall not make any idol etc. etc

 

The same as above. When you know that only one god exists and that only he deserves worship, it would be a crime not to do so. You can only be held responsible for what you knew.

 

Third Commandement: You shall not speak my name in futile etc. etc.

 

Ever heard of insult against a functionary? It is a crime to insult a functionary in our society, so why shouldn't it be a crime to insult god?

 

Fourth Commandement: Remember the day of Sabbat and keep it holy etc. etc

 

In fact this law is of a more practical nature. God creates a holiday, so that people can recover from work and makes it a crime to work on this holiday, so everyone is forced to recover from work. But I don't think that anyone has to be forced to take a holiday (with the exception of workaholics of course).

 

Fifth Commandement: Honour your father and mother etc. etc.

 

Why shouldn't you honour your parents? They brought you to this world, they gave you food and brought you up.

 

Sixth Commandement: You shall not kill (more accurate translation: You shall not murder)

 

I think this is pretty clear. There aren't much societies on this planet which allow murder or even encourage it (some tribes on New Guineau had such customs).

 

Seventh Commandement: You shall not commit adultery.

 

This law is a problem for a lot of people in our today society (at least in my country, Switzerland). In the biblical perspective, marriage is something holy and very special. In fact, it is the process of two beings becoming one being (This is why a man will leave his parents and go to a woman and they will become one flesh). In the biblical perspective, a man or a woman alone is not a complete human being. In order to become complete, both have to become one. To commit adultery breaks this oneness.

 

Eigth Commandement: You shall not steal.

 

I think this doesn't need further explanation.

 

Ninth Commandement: You shall not speak as false witness against your next.

 

This law covers a much larger field than just speaking as a false witness in front of a court. It also means not to destroy the reputation of someone by talking behind their backs.

 

Tenth Commandement: You shall not desire anything that belongs to your next.

 

The basic human problem. If we would be content with what we have and not desire what belongs to someone else, we wouldn't have any problems. There wouldn't be any wars, fights, disputes etc. etc.

 

 

So, after covering the ten commandements, I'll have to add something to the problem of commiting crimes without your knowlegde. Can someone be held responsible for commiting a crime, even when this person didn't knew that it was a crime? In our today society it is a rule: "Not knowing is not an excuse". So, what tells the bible to this subject?

We know from the bible that only a person which never broke the law can enter god's realm of absolute holiness. Because no person can totally furfill the law of god, no person could enter the realm of god. So Jesus had to pay the punishment so that we could enter his realm, despite we broke the law. So anyone who accepts the salvation will enter heaven. Anyone not will not enter heaven.

Sounds simple. And it also sounds not just. But there is a very strange passage in the gospel of Mathew (Mat 25, 31 - 46). There Jesus says that those will enter the realm of god which did good things in their lives (helping the poor etc.). So, if only those can enter the realm of god which accepted the gift of the salvation, why then says Jesus that also people who did good things in their lifes can enter god's realm? Some theologists think that this passage refers to people who never had any choice. It refers to people who never knew of god's law or the salvation through Jesus. Those people will be jugded by what they knew and what they did with this knowlegde. Sounds fair, doesn't it?

 

Now there is another thing with which a lot of you had a problem. Everyone which broke god's law will go to hell, no matter if he only lied once in his live or if he was a mass murderer. This doesn't sound just and it isn't just. But you should consider something:

Everyone who commits a crime has to suffer the punishment, correct? But in order to be just, not every crime should receive the same punishment. There are passages in the bible which indicates that there are grades in heaven (in some of the letters of Paul). Why shouldn't there be different grades of punishment in hell? There is even a passage in the bible which tells that Jesus went down to hell and preached to the people there and that some of them were saved. So perhaps even when you die and go to hell, there will be another chance for you to go to heaven. And there is the matter of the last tribunal (Rev 20, 11 - 15). There it says that all the dead will be juged by the way they acted in life. So you could also apply Matthew 25, 31 - 46 to this tribunal.

 

Now that this matter is cleared, I can move on to the matter if god broke his own law. The great flood was mentioned. Some said that this is proof that god broke his own law.

It states clearly that no one was innocent these days, except Noah and his family. When we take the bible to be true, then also this must be true. So when god wiped out the earth, he only killed criminals. Or let us say it somewhat different: He shortened their already doomed life.

And another thing: God doesn't think like we do. For god this life is only a very short period, almost nothing. For him, this life of ours is more like a shadow, the spiritual world is more real than our world will ever be. Platon knew more of the truth than he ever thought (he came up with the idea that our world was only a shadow, the real world is the world of ideas). For god, death is only a portal to the real life: the spiritual life. So when those people died, god just brought them back to reality and to where they belong: the place of their punishment. In the New Testament it is stated, that Jesus stepped down to preach to those who died in or before the great flood and that some were saved. So those who died there got another chance. And as everyone else, they will be juged at the end of the world in the last tribunal. And when the bible is true, this tribunal will be just.

 

I don't have the time to go through everything in the bible. It would take years to debate over everything written in the bible. But perhaps I will later on add some more things written in the bible and look at them.

[eldowan]

great flood was mentioned. Some said that this is proof that god broke his own law.

It states clearly that no one was innocent these days, except Noah and his family. When we take the bible to be true, then also this must be true. So when god wiped out the earth, he only killed criminals.

 

Isnt the reason that no one is innocent, including the infants and small children, because the sins of the parents are inherited to the child?

 

If this is true, then Noah and his family could not have been innocent, and for god to spare only them would be unjust.

[Darnoc]

@Eldowan: No, it also states that the line of Noah was the only one which lived the way god intended them to do. E.G. Henoch, who was directly taken to god without dying.

[Breton Thief Oriana]

That isn't justice. Part of justice is that the consequences of actions are absolute law, and all cases are treated equally. Bribing the judge shouldn't have any effect on the punishment. Which is exactly what God does... if you satisfy his ego enough, you get forgiven.

 

First off, what consequences? All maner of things go unpunished for no reason. And secondly, it isnt a bribe. You dont give him anything when you repent. You only ask for his forgiveness, which he gives allways (His "merciful" side). Read the bible, its your argument that its true.

 

 

God has no choice. If God does not know the outcome, no matter how small or remote in time, of every action he chooses (creation for example), then he is no longer all knowing. This is not a conscious choice of God, it is a consequence of his form of existence.

 

Well, if we have no choice, AND god has no choice, then who has choice? bad argument, but a B+ for hygene. you argued the exact opposite of this above. evidently you cant answer why either. of course god has choice--it was his idea to make the universe as he saw fit. and even more perplexing, "he has no choice".

 

 

Are you reading my arguments or are you just making up stuff to argue against? Where did I say that God would destroy the universe? If I understand which part of my arguments you are refering to correctly, I argued the exact opposite! Entropy and the destruction of the universe are entirely separate concepts.

 

Though if God wanted to destroy the universe, he could do so. I wouldn't be suprised, considering his proven sadism/insanity.

 

You seem to take a dr. phil tone when you reply. God would create a paradox if he was all knowing--IE, he'd have to know the future also, which is impossible. Of course, if it was possible, and he did, then he would destroy the universe through use of such power. And also, if you didn't alredy know, disorder leads to destruction. Thusly, once the entropy occured through the use of such power (IE how seeing the future would create the dissorder), it would create a spiral towards oblivion. thats a big change, isnt it? well, assuming god is all powerful, he could just make things to the exact dimensions of just before the destruction occured without the paradox. but he'd still see the future recreating the incident. However, i do concede that god is insane. any idiot knows god is insane, or at least thinks it from time to time.

 

 

It's an off topic argument that you never should have brought into this debate. If you want to discuss the accuracy of the bible, feel free to do so elsewhere. But in this debate, the initial statements are unarguable (for very good reasons listed elsewhere).

 

yet it is an important possibillity. and if god is not god, than he isnt moral. think of how that helps your argument that god is immoral...mmm, good for you to accept possibillities.

 

 

You don't get it. Human knowledge and God's knowledge are entirely different things. We might not know something, and it might appear random to us, but it is not to God. God knows all of these things, and planned them to happen exactly as they do.

 

Human knowledge is enough to tell us that we will eventually have god's knowledge. all it takes is your proclaimed illusionary "Time". I know what i learned in my math classes. if something doesnt terminate nor repeat, it goes on for infinity. infinity isnt random, but it is ever large.

 

 

Translation: if the truth is unpleasant, look for a way, no matter how unreasonable, that it might not be the truth.

 

I'll state again, That might not be the truth. As of now, you dont really know because you havent spoken with the angry, immoral "god" that rules over you.

 

 

Translation: you won't concede defeat no matter how badly your arguments fail. Why are you even debating if you state from the beginning that you will not accept loss?

 

Well, not if i dont think im losing. maybe i think we are neck and neck, especially since your arguments aggainst mine are the same ones you alredy stated. I read you, percieve what you say, reply. and you keep saying the same thing. with what we learned in Civics, you'd be a reactionary voter, extreme conservatism, has the same answers for everything, and they all follow tradition. change is inherent, accept the morning breeze with each drop of dew--it is a sign of winter to come after the mild autumn.

 

 

 

NOTE: sry for delayed post, i dont get off school till three in central time zone.

 

 

POST NOTE< LATER EDIT: i concede the debate until i can straighten out things with my mom...had a fight this afternoon, and am going to be grounded until further notice--(IE, it sux majorly...)--or, actually, jsut all together. im sort of mad at her right now because of it.

[ThetaOrionis01]

Isnt the reason that no one is innocent, including the infants and small children, because the sins of the parents are inherited to the child?

As far as I know the obscene concept of original sin was invented by Augustine, and isn't actually in the bible.

 

 

 

However, since it has already been established that there is no free will, and god created people so that they would break his laws, punishing them for their transgressions is and remains immoral, Darnoc.

 

 

First Commandement: You shall not have any other gods beside me.

 

Some said that this law isn't just because you can't punish someone for believing something else (assuming that god exists and that the bible is right, something wrong). You should keep in mind that these laws were created for the Hebrews (and for all the people believing in god).

 

 

In that case, god should have spared all those who didn't believe in him in the flood. He didn't. He killed everyone except Noah and his family. Ergo, god is an immoral, indiscriminate murderer.

 

 

Third Commandement: You shall not speak my name in futile etc. etc.

 

Ever heard of insult against a functionary? It is a crime to insult a functionary in our society, so why shouldn't it be a crime to insult god?

 

It is? In fascist dictatorships, maybe. Whatever happened to free speech, which seems to have a place in most countries' constitutions? So can we conclude that god suppresses free speech - which is also immoral?

 

 

Fifth Commandement: Honour your father and mother etc. etc.

 

Why shouldn't you honour your parents? They brought you to this world, they gave you food and brought you up.

 

What if your parents are child abusers? Is it a crime not to honour them in that case?

 

 

Fourth Commandement: Remember the day of Sabbat and keep it holy etc. etc

 

In fact this law is of a more practical nature. God creates a holiday, so that people can recover from work and makes it a crime to work on this holiday, so everyone is forced to recover from work. But I don't think that anyone has to be forced to take a holiday (with the exception of workaholics of course).

 

Keyword: forced

 

 

Sixth Commandement: You shall not kill (more accurate translation: You shall not murder)

 

I think this is pretty clear. There aren't much societies on this planet which allow murder or even encourage it (some tribes on New Guineau had such customs).

 

We've already established that god violated that commandment repeatedly

 

 

Seventh Commandement: You shall not commit adultery.

 

This law is a problem for a lot of people in our today society (at least in my country, Switzerland). In the biblical perspective, marriage is something holy and very special. In fact, it is the process of two beings becoming one being (This is why a man will leave his parents and go to a woman and they will become one flesh). In the biblical perspective, a man or a woman alone is not a complete human being. In order to become complete, both have to become one. To commit adultery breaks this oneness.

 

 

Now, the problem here is that god created the adulterers in the first place. If he objects so strongly to that, he should have created only people who would remain faithful to one partner until death doth them part. Yet he doesn't. Hypocrite.

 

 

Tenth Commandement: You shall not desire anything that belongs to your next.

 

The basic human problem. If we would be content with what we have and not desire what belongs to someone else, we wouldn't have any problems. There wouldn't be any wars, fights, disputes etc. etc.

 

True. Sadly, god created us to be greedy and selfish. So once again, if he didn't want us to be covetous, he shouldn't have created us that way.

 

 

So, when you take into account the fact that god created us fully aware that we would break those laws, those laws can only be considered as hypocritical in the extreme.

 

 

And I noticed something else in your post that I would like to comment on.

 

For god, death is only a portal to the real life: the spiritual life. So when those people died, god just brought them back to reality and to where they belong: the place of their punishment

 

I believe that is precisely the excuse used by those carrying out genocide in god's name - the crusaders, the conquistadors, the inquisitors. A famous anecdote from the massacre of Beziers, I believe: the town was said to shelter 'heretics'. When the town was taken by, I believe the forces of the inquisition, the victors didn't even try to establish who was a 'heretic' and under their barbarous laws 'deserved' death - they killed every man, woman and child in the town. Everyone. Their reason: 'let god tell them apart'.

Looks like those acting in the name of god were just following their god's example.

[Darnoc]

In that case, god should have spared all those who didn't believe in him in the flood. He didn't. He killed everyone except Noah and his family. Ergo, god is an immoral, indiscriminate murderer.

 

It was exaclty 1650 years since the creation of the world. Adam himself had died sevenhundred years before the flood began. Take in count that people at this time (according to the bible) lived very long. At the time the flood began, a lot of people still lived who knew Adam. Methusalem, Noah's grandfather and the oldest human being, died in the year of the flood. The last one to be born in the time while Adam was still living was Lamech, Noahs father. The people of this time still remembered what happened. The living memory of these events, Adam, they all remembered walking amongst them. They all knew exactly what had happened. But they choose not to do what was right. None of them was innocent, except Noah and his family. End of discussion.

 

It is? In fascist dictatorships, maybe. Whatever happened to free speech, which seems to have a place in most countries' constitutions? So can we conclude that god suppresses free speech - which is also immoral?

 

Really? Switzerland has free speech. But still it is forbidden to insult someone. You can press charges against someone who insulted you. Insult against any functionary costs you even more. And Switzerland is the most free country in the world, it possesses the most direct democracy in this world and was the only country in which the people choose to join the UNO.

 

We've already established that god violated that commandment repeatedly

 

He may have killed. But since his law states in fact "You shall not murder" you still have to prove that he did murder in order to prove that he broke the law. And since until now no one could really prove that he murdered (the flood I already discussed in my last post) he is innocent. You are innocent until proven guilty, right?

 

Now, the problem here is that god created the adulterers in the first place. If he objects so strongly to that, he should have created only people who would remain faithful to one partner until death doth them part. Yet he doesn't. Hypocrite.

 

God did create humans this way. But because humans choose to do evil, this relationship between man and woman was destroyed, as a result of the fall (Gen 3, 16). So in order to still keep it the way it was meant to be, god had to make laws. Discipline yourself. It certainly doesn't hurt.

 

True. Sadly, god created us to be greedy and selfish. So once again, if he didn't want us to be covetous, he shouldn't have created us that way.

 

No, he didn't. In the beginning, we weren't this way. But we became this way when we choose evil.

 

So, when you take into account the fact that god created us fully aware that we would break those laws, those laws can only be considered as hypocritical in the extreme.

 

Interesting. Then every law is hypocritical in the extreme. Because it is not possible for any human being to not break the law. Even our own human laws. I don't know any human who never broke the law. Every human being has broken the law. Perhaps you got away with it, but still you broke the law. Don't make me believe that you never broke the law.

 

And something else: God never intended those laws for us to be hold. He knew that we couldn't furfill any law he would give us, at least since the fall. God's law isn't here to be furfilled. Its purpose is that we can see that we have broken the law. If you never read a law-book you do not know what the law is and so you do not know when you break the law. Until you are arrested of course.

The purpose of god's law is that we can discover that we have broken the law and that we are condemned. Then we should come to the conclusion that we need help. And this is where Jesus comes in. He payed the price, the punishment. When we discover that we broke the law, that we deserve punishment and that we need help, we will discover that Jesus already had suffered the punishment and then we can accept the safing hand god streaches out towards us. This is the purpose of god's law. Read the Letter of Paul to the Romans.

 

I believe that is precisely the excuse used by those carrying out genocide in god's name - the crusaders, the conquistadors, the inquisitors. A famous anecdote from the massacre of Beziers, I believe: the town was said to shelter 'heretics'. When the town was taken by, I believe the forces of the inquisition, the victors didn't even try to establish who was a 'heretic' and under their barbarous laws 'deserved' death - they killed every man, woman and child in the town. Everyone. Their reason: 'let god tell them apart'.

Looks like those acting in the name of god were just following their god's example.

 

True and sad facts. Such things happened (sadly) and it is a shame. But those people were humans and they had no right, no right at all to jugde other people. It is damn bad excuse to say "Let god tell them apart". But god isn't human. In fact he can tell apart, but we can't. So he can do such a thing, because he knows who did something wrong, even when we do not see it. He knows everything. We do not. We can not jugde other humans, because of our lack of knowlegde. We do not know every fact and so every human jugdment lacks justice. But god does know everything. So he is the only being existing which can truly judge justly. He is the only being qualified to make a jugdement, because only he knows all the facts and knows all the connections.

[ThetaOrionis01]

End of discussion

 

Are you denying me my right to free speech now? <_<

 

 

So....nobody lived on earth who wasn't an adult Hebrew? There was not a single person who believed in another god, and not a single child on earth? Not likely. You didn't state anywhere how young the youngest person to be killed in the flood was. I think the probability that there was not a single child alive at the time can be discounted. Therefore the flood is still murder.

 

 

And since until now no one could really prove that he murdered (the flood I already discussed in my last post) he is innocent.

 

No. The flood was murder.

 

But because humans choose to do evil,

 

We've established over and over again that humans cannot choose to do evil because they do not have free will.

 

Discipline yourself. It certainly doesn't hurt.

 

Excuse me?!?

 

 

But we became this way when we choose evil

 

As before...we do not have free will, therefore we cannot choose evil.

 

 

Interesting. Then every law is hypocritical in the extreme.

 

No. Your government didn't genetically engineer you - having first consulted a crystal ball to see every choice you would ever make - in such a way that it would be impossible for you not to break your government's laws. God created humans and his laws in such a way that it was impossible for those humans not to break them. That's hypocritical at best, though sadistic is perhaps more appropriate.

 

 

Because it is not possible for any human being to not break the law. Even our own human laws.

Really? How odd that not everyone has a criminal record then.

 

 

I don't know any human who never broke the law. Every human being has broken the law.

 

Since I doubt that you personally know every person on the planet your second statement does not follow from the first one.

 

 

Perhaps you got away with it, but still you broke the law. Don't make me believe that you never broke the law.

 

You are making assumptions about other people again. That is not debating.

 

 

God never intended those laws for us to be hold. He knew that we couldn't furfill any law he would give us, at least since the fall. God's law isn't here to be furfilled.

 

How very interesting. Now you yourself concede that God is a hypocrite.

[punkfiveo]

@ everyone.... This thread is getting a little personal for everyone. Calm it down. When push comes to shove, it's all about what YOU choose to believe in.

 

@ hypocrites....do not state something to be true, and then go around and change your views. (I think I just recited the definition of hipocrasy...) Either state something to be true and expand on it, or keep it shut and research a little more. (Yes, I am trying to hinder your freedom of speech....for your own good.)

 

@ Peregrine...................................

 

 

Because he has a massive ego, and he can't stand the thought of anyone not worshipping him.

 

This is making assumptions about God.

 

Your point? You can't say God doesn't have to obey our perspective and then justify all his actions based on our perspective.

 

This is exactly what he has done, though, in the Bible.

 

Furthermore, God does not obey our perspective, rather, we obey His. (Given my beliefs and what the Bible says, your beliefs don't count on this statement, because you do not believe in God.) <------Let me elaborate what I just said...I said that since you do not believe in God, you, then, cannot tell me that God obeys my perspective, because God has already given me a perspective of Him through the Bible.

 

Furthermore, the Bible says that we were created in the image of God, ergo, we obey His perspectives of Love/Hate, Compassion/Vengeance, etc.

 

Concession accepted, thank you for trying to debate.

 

Please refrain from attacks relating to the style of my arguments.

 

If God chooses these characteristics only so we can understand him better, he can abandon them at will. God's laws of good/evil and forgiveness are no longer absolute, and only one conclusion remains:

 

He enforces his twisted sense of "justice" because he wants to be a barbaric murderer.

 

He CAN abandon them at will, but he DIDN'T. There is a difference in being able to do something and actually doing it! Nothing more to say here, your argument is absolutely relative on whether or not God has abandoned His characteristics.

 

Then he chooses to be vengeful. God's genocidal system of "justice" is the product of his own sadistic mind, not an absolute law.

 

Absolutely wrong. The Bible tells us that God is compassionate.

 

Also, by stating what you said, you are taking the place of God in your argument.

 

Concession accepted. God's actions are the result of his choices. God chooses evil.

 

Again taking place of God.

 

Except that by your own definition, God is all-knowing. God knew when he created the world that I would not believe in him. Therefore I am inevitably sentenced to Hell. Only a criminal would create people just so he can punish them.

 

At this point you are not definitely sentenced to Hell, because you have free will. And presently, because you have free will, you are choosing to sentence yourself to hell.

 

1) You yourself say that God doesn't have to divide people into heaven/hell. Therefore it is his choice that he be a genocidal murderer and sentence countless people to a fate worse than death.

 

As I said before, the people who are going to hell are not there because mean ol' God wants to be genocidal, but because they choose to go to hell because they believe they don't have a choice.

 

2) By that definition, we have no free will. When God created the universe, he created it a specific way. Since he is all-knowing, he knew exactly what result it would produce. Therefore all evil in history has been inevitable since the creation of the universe. God creates people so he can toy with them and punish them eternally for his own actions.

 

Being that I am only human, I cannot explain why we can still have free will, and God can still be all-knowing. But I'm sure He has an answer, and I am sure that's one of the questions I'll ask Him when I am dead.

 

his makes no sense. Sure, heaven might become less perfect, but I at least would have no trouble understanding God just as well either way. In fact, God does this already when he forgives sinners. Those sinners, no matter how evil, can be forgiven of all their crimes by simply accepting God and satisfying his ego enough. By any civilized definition, the have not paid any price for their actions, can not be forgiven, and are still just as evil.

 

You are not all-knowing, so you do not know what is inside the hearts of other people. You can't trick God to get into heaven, so by repenting, it comes straight from the heart. In my opinion, humans do not need to judge others, because God is the judge of all, and the Bible says that by what measure you judge others, you too, shall be judged by that same measure.

 

See above. God is all-knowing. Therefore every action in my life was known to God before he even created the universe. I am merely following his script, no matter how much I might think I have freedom to choose. Every one of my choices has already been made. I was doomed to hell before I was even born. Only an evil God could do this

 

Answer this question please: If God is so evil, why then, is there even a heaven?

 

-And answer it without taking the place of God.

 

@ Theta....................................

 

Most humans aren't quite that simple. I do NOT have to have experienced hatred in order to be able to love someone. It is quite sufficient for me to be able to distinguish the feelings I have for a loved one from the indifference I feel towards others.

 

In NO way am I saying that. What I am saying is that love cannot exist without the existence of hate. This does NOT mean that you must have had an experience with hate before you have an experience with love. Think of it like this...If there were a world in which love is non existent, there would be no possible way for people to know that they hate each other. Get what I am saying? They would not feel "indifferent" because there would be nothing to feel indifferent from.

 

I hope I have made some progress with you on this one. :P

 

Answer me this question: are you god?

 

Nope.

 

Then how can you be so absolutely certain about me? You are making an assumption about my feelings about which you know precisely nothing.

 

Hear me on this, I am not posing a personal question, but a universal one!

 

I do not have to hate another child to be able to love mine. I do not have to know recklessness in order to wish to protect my child. And emotional detachment does not equate with hatred.

 

As above, you do not have to have an experience with or even KNOW about the existence of hate to feel love. But it DOES have to exist in order for love to exist.

 

Most humans are capable of a wide spectrum of emotions which is not confined to extremes. If you are not capable of this, then I do feel very sorry for you. But the world is not as black and wide as you paint it.

 

Of course not. The world is a mixture of black and white: known as grey. There are many different forms of grey. There is dark grey, light grey, medium grey, medium-ish grey, dark-ish grey, you get the point. And these "greys" encompass all of the wide spectrum of emotions that you stated.

 

That depends on how you define 'exquisite jewel'. The diamond still maintains the properties for which it is valued - it is still the hardest material there is which can cut any other. It is still made up out of carbon in a particular crystal structure.

 

I am sure that "supply and demand" would cut the cost of a single 1k diamond to a billionth of what it is now. So yes, the diamond IS defined by the other rocks, even though it's properties would still be quite notable.

 

Precisely. But he chooses to be cruel.

 

In this statement, you took the place of God.

 

yet all sinners go to hell

 

They do not. Everyone is a sinner, therefore everyone goes to hell? No. Non-repentant sinners choose to go to hell. (If you do not believe in God then this statement should not make you offended.)

 

The situation is that God appears in front of you today and hands you the newly written commandment:

 

Thou shalt sacrifice a child in my name every week. Thou shalt kill it in the most painful way possible, so that its screams may properly honor me. This command is good, holy, and just. This is God's word.

 

In seeing this commandment, it would make the Bible void, and I would not be a Christian. Since "god" has previously stated that "Thou shalt not murder", he has directly contradicted Himself, making himself not true to His word, and a hipocrite.

 

But since I have not found any hypocritical things in the Bible so far, I will not cease to believe.

 

Really? How odd that not everyone has a criminal record then.

 

They just haven't been caught.

 

However, since it has already been established that there is no free will

 

Very wrong of you to say that. Since you do not believe in God, you, then, have free will don't you? And if you DO believe in God, then isn't the your FAITH based on the acceptance that God has given you free will, and that He has somehow maintained His knowledge of everything AND His justification of everything?

 

The reason I said faith in caps was because faith directly relates to the Bible. That is WHY they call it faith, because you must take it on FAITH that God is not evil or cruel.

 

This is probly why you do not believe in God, because you choose to remain skeptical. Skepticism is good, as opposed to dogmatism, but if you are waiting for a definite answer, you'll be waiting for a long time, perhaps, until it is too late for an answer. (For example, when death rolls around the corner, and when it does come around, you'll find that the answer isn't even worth waiting for, and that it would have been wiser to believe rather than remain skeptical, regardless of the answer.)

 

edit: fixed quote tags

[hundinman]

@Peregrine: I missunderstood your concept. All I saw was: God has appeared before you and given you this 11th commandment. It sounded to me as if you were saying God has appeared to his people and given us the commandment.

 

My argument: IF God gave me this commandment I would follow it. First because of my absolute faith in his divine nature and power. Secondly because I love him and he gave his son to die for us and I would give a child for him. I know that this is hypothetical and a what-if statement and I have presented my argument. This is a side note- I don't have to worry because God will not do this but IF HE DID I would obey it.

 

I have made a terrible mistake in one of my prevous posts.

I wrote that God only made 10 commandments and this is false. There are 12, but I thought that we were referring to the 10 commandments given to Noah in the book of EXODUS. Sorry, the two additional commands are:

1- Thou shalt love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind ,and soul.

2- Thou shalt love your neighbor as you love yourself.

 

Well, here it is. My on-topic argument about the what-if 11th commandment.

[Peregrine]

@ everyone.... This thread is getting a little personal for everyone. Calm it down. When push comes to shove, it's all about what YOU choose to believe in.

 

When push comes to shove it's all about what is the truth. Personal opinions are a distant second to reality.

 

@ hypocrites....do not state something to be true, and then go around and change your views. (I think I just recited the definition of hipocrasy...) Either state something to be true and expand on it, or keep it shut and research a little more. (Yes, I am trying to hinder your freedom of speech....for your own good.)

 

Who are you refering to? I have argued the same point since this debate started.

 

This is making assumptions about God.

 

What assumption, that God has an ego problem? According to the rules of this debate, we can judge God. I judge him as having an ego problem.

 

This is exactly what he has done, though, in the Bible.

 

Furthermore, God does not obey our perspective, rather, we obey His. (Given my beliefs and what the Bible says, your beliefs don't count on this statement, because you do not believe in God.) <------Let me elaborate what I just said...I said that since you do not believe in God, you, then, cannot tell me that God obeys my perspective, because God has already given me a perspective of Him through the Bible.

 

Furthermore, the Bible says that we were created in the image of God, ergo, we obey His perspectives of Love/Hate, Compassion/Vengeance, etc.

 

Then if we share the same perspective, we should act and be judged by it. God is either obeying a completely different perspective than us or he is immoral. Take your pick.

 

Please refrain from attacks relating to the style of my arguments.

 

Please refrain from using flawed logic and poor arguments.

 

He CAN abandon them at will, but he DIDN'T. There is a difference in being able to do something and actually doing it! Nothing more to say here, your argument is absolutely relative on whether or not God has abandoned His characteristics.

 

Concession accepted. God chooses to act as he does. Therefore "God has no choice, so he can not be judged for it" is not a valid explanation. God is evil.

 

Absolutely wrong. The Bible tells us that God is compassionate.

 

The bible tells us that God says he is compassionate. His actions say otherwise.

 

At this point you are not definitely sentenced to Hell, because you have free will. And presently, because you have free will, you are choosing to sentence yourself to hell.

 

Do you even read my arguments before you reply with your religious propaganda? We do not have free will. If I later choose too abandon my atheistic beliefs, that decision had been made by God as soon as he decided how he would create the universe. If I keep them, the same thing is true. The free will I think I have is just an illusion.

 

As I said before, the people who are going to hell are not there because mean ol' God wants to be genocidal, but because they choose to go to hell because they believe they don't have a choice.

 

We don't have a choice. Either reply to my "there is no free will" argument with why we do have some, or concede that part of the debate.

 

Being that I am only human, I cannot explain why we can still have free will, and God can still be all-knowing. But I'm sure He has an answer, and I am sure that's one of the questions I'll ask Him when I am dead.

 

The answer is simple. You don't have any free will. You have the illusion of free will.

 

You are not all-knowing, so you do not know what is inside the hearts of other people. You can't trick God to get into heaven, so by repenting, it comes straight from the heart. In my opinion, humans do not need to judge others, because God is the judge of all, and the Bible says that by what measure you judge others, you too, shall be judged by that same measure.

 

So if I tortured and murdered a thousand people you would say I shouldn't be punished by the laws of man?

 

Answer this question please: If God is so evil, why then, is there even a heaven?

 

Because God is not entirely evil. He shows mercy towards those who satisfy his ego enough.

 

Of course I question the value of heaven... since it is God's domain, it must incorporate God's system of justice... therefore I doubt heaven is as pleasant as you might think (by our human standards).

 

===============================

 

I am sure that "supply and demand" would cut the cost of a single 1k diamond to a billionth of what it is now. So yes, the diamond IS defined by the other rocks, even though it's properties would still be quite notable.

 

Diamonds are valued for more than their dollar cost. A diamond is no less beautiful if it is common. A diamond's material properties are no less useful if they are easily obtained.

 

 

 

The situation is that God appears in front of you today and hands you the newly written commandment:

 

Thou shalt sacrifice a child in my name every week. Thou shalt kill it in the most painful way possible, so that its screams may properly honor me. This command is good, holy, and just. This is God's word.

In seeing this commandment, it would make the Bible void, and I would not be a Christian. Since "god" has previously stated that "Thou shalt not murder", he has directly contradicted Himself, making himself not true to His word, and a hipocrite.

 

But since I have not found any hypocritical things in the Bible so far, I will not cease to believe.

 

Concession accepted, thank you for trying to debate. Read my posts next time before you argue against them.

 

But fine, if it will make you happy, God has also added this commandment to the bible. Call it a revised printing. God has now redefined Christianity. God is omnipotent, he can do that.

 

And according to your side, it isn't murder if God/his believers do the killing for justified reasons. And God has now declared that it is justified and right.

 

Now stop dodging the question. Answer yes or no, or concede the debate.

 

Very wrong of you to say that. Since you do not believe in God, you, then, have free will don't you? And if you DO believe in God, then isn't the your FAITH based on the acceptance that God has given you free will, and that He has somehow maintained His knowledge of everything AND His justification of everything?

 

 

Of course I believe in free will, since God doesn't exist. But for purposes of this debate, God does exist. If that condition is unarguable, we have no free will.

 

The reason I said faith in caps was because faith directly relates to the Bible. That is WHY they call it faith, because you must take it on FAITH that God is not evil or cruel.

 

Because you can't take it on anything else. By any sane defintion, God is a barbaric murderer. All you have to counter that are God's lying words.