10 Dec 07
Originally posted by Jay JoosRead the bible. Destruction of almost all life on Earth in the Great Flood; incitement to genocide; threat of torture and eternal punishment for non-believers; letting Satan kill off Job's family as a loyalty test; sacrificing his own son; etc. It's not really difficult to see the God of the bible as a monster.
Why would you believe him to be a monster...i think you are confusing God with Satan!
10 Dec 07
Originally posted by NordlysSince you don't believe any of it anyway, why do you miss characterise God as a monster?
Read the bible. Destruction of almost all life on Earth in the Great Flood; incitement to genocide; threat of torture and eternal punishment for non-believers; letting Satan kill off Job's family as a loyalty test; sacrificing his own son; etc. It's not really difficult to see the God of the bible as a monster.
You don't know him so why do you mock him?
10 Dec 07
Originally posted by NordlysThere are at least two gods described in the old testament; one is characterized as "Lord" and seems closely related to Baal or Ra. The other is characterized as "Father" and seems more closely related to Aten and Ahura Mazda.
Read the bible. Destruction of almost all life on Earth in the Great Flood; incitement to genocide; threat of torture and eternal punishment for non-believers; letting Satan kill off Job's family as a loyalty test; sacrificing his own son; etc. It's not really difficult to see the God of the bible as a monster.
Comparisons between the oldest Gods of the old testament and a monster or devil may not be that out of line.
Moses brother is building an idol when Moses returns from the Mount. The idol is a bull, a common symbol for Ba'al. In the city of Ekron, the local deity was Ba'al Zebub a name that is later changed to Beelzebub. Ba'al Zebub is lord of the flies (or things that fly). We can see a reference here to battles and Ba'al is sometimes described as "Lord of Hosts"
The ancient Jews had a pantheon and worshipped a number of gods. The god that emerges is the "Father" god. Like Aten, this God is primarily benevolent and life-giving.
10 Dec 07
Originally posted by Red NightBull!
There are at least two gods described in the old testament; one is characterized as "Lord" and seems closely related to Baal or Ra. The other is characterized as "Father" and seems more closely related to Aten and Ahura Mazda.
Comparisons between the oldest Gods of the old testament and a monster or devil may not be that out of line.
Moses brother ...[text shortened]... s is the "Father" god. Like Aten, this God is primarily benevolent and life-giving.
10 Dec 07
Originally posted by josephwThe reason why I brought this up is because you said that God extends his grace to every believer, no matter whether they worship him or not. It just doesn't make much sense to me that he would extend his grace to someone who believes in him, but hates him, while he would not extend his grace to someone who doesn't believe in him.
Since you don't believe any of it anyway, why do you miss characterise God as a monster?
You don't know him so why do you mock him?
How do you explain away all the atrocities?
10 Dec 07
Originally posted by Red NightI don't think God was responsible for anything, as I don't believe he exists. But if you believe in the bible, a lot of atrocities were not only committed in the name of God, but by himself or on his orders. The God of the bible is not a god I would want to worship, even if I would believe in his existence.
Why do you focus on the atrocities?
Have atrocities been committed in the name of God? Yes.
Have atrocities been committed in the name of man? Yes
Was God responsible for these atrocities or was man?
10 Dec 07
Originally posted by NordlysYou prefer to worship the God of science?
I don't think God was responsible for anything, as I don't believe he exists. But if you believe in the bible, a lot of atrocities were not only committed in the name of God, but by himself or on his orders. The God of the bible is not a god I would want to worship, even if I would believe in his existence.
Who brought us the atom bomb, the fire-bomb, the gattling gun, dynamite, anthrax?
Science also brought us many good things....very similiar to religion which brought bot hgood and bad.
If you subsitute science for God, you do not eliminate God you merely substitute one human understanding of the deity with another.
10 Dec 07
Originally posted by Red NightWorshipping science doesn't make sense. Science isn't good or bad in itself; it's the way humans make use of scientific knowledge that is good or bad. I believe that humans are responsible for their behaviour, no matter whether they use science or God as an excuse.
You prefer to worship the God of science?
Who brought us the atom bomb, the fire-bomb, the gattling gun, dynamite, anthrax?
Science also brought us many good things....very similiar to religion which brought bot hgood and bad.
If you subsitute science for God, you do not eliminate God you merely substitute one human understanding of the deity with another.
10 Dec 07
Originally posted by NordlysExactly!!! I think you've got it. God isn't good or bad in itself; it's the way humans make use God that is good or bad. I believe that humans are responsible for their behaviour, no matter whether they use science or God as an excuse.
Worshipping science doesn't make sense. Science isn't good or bad in itself; it's the way humans make use of scientific knowledge that is good or bad. I believe that humans are responsible for their behaviour, no matter whether they use science or God as an excuse.
10 Dec 07
Originally posted by Red NightThat's mostly what I have been saying all along, with the exception that a statement like "God isn't good or bad in itself" doesn't make sense to me as I don't believe God is. But we have been there before. I don't believe that a mental construct constitutes existence, you apparently do.
Exactly!!! I think you've got it. God isn't good or bad in itself; it's the way humans make use God that is good or bad. I believe that humans are responsible for their behaviour, no matter whether they use science or God as an excuse.
10 Dec 07
Originally posted by NordlysWe have been here before and the thought is too complicated to fully express on a forum.
That's mostly what I have been saying all along, with the exception that a statement like "God isn't good or bad in itself" doesn't make sense to me as I don't believe God is. But we have been there before. I don't believe that a mental construct constitutes existence, you apparently do.
It is possible that we are merely toads imagining we are humans. It is possible that all around us is just an illusion.
Reality is what we perceive it to be. On some levels, if not many levels, the belief in god makes him/her real. Even the belief in the non-existence of God makes him/her/it real.
11 Dec 07
Originally posted by NordlysSomeone who believes in God WOULD not believe him to be a monster!!!
The reason why I brought this up is because you said that God extends his grace to every believer, no matter whether they worship him or not. It just doesn't make much sense to me that he would extend his grace to someone who believes in him, but hates him, while he would not extend his grace to someone who doesn't believe in him.
How do you explain away all the atrocities?