Originally posted by josephw I really want to say something here that makes some sense.
If you are going to isolate an act of God out of it's context and not within the larger picture, you are going to stumble right over the truth and not even know it. On it's surface, the atheist is going to balk at a God that kills innocent children. That's how the argument is framed. God is a kille ...[text shortened]... rom human history how lives were sacrificed for the benefit others. Both forced and heroic.
Originally posted by josephw I really want to say something here that makes some sense.
If you are going to isolate an act of God out of it's context and not within the larger picture, you are going to stumble right over the truth and not even know it. On it's surface, the atheist is going to balk at a God that kills innocent children. That's how the argument is framed. God is a kille rom human history how lives were sacrificed for the benefit others. Both forced and heroic.
Originally posted by josephw I really want to say something here that makes some sense.
If you are going to isolate an act of God out of it's context and not within the larger picture, you are going to stumble right over the truth and not even know it. On it's surface, the atheist is going to balk at a God that kills innocent children. That's how the argument is framed. God is a kille rom human history how lives were sacrificed for the benefit others. Both forced and heroic.
Out of context? The "larger" picture. (What does that mean!?) You are not making 'sense' to me!
Originally posted by josephw I really want to say something here that makes some sense.
If you are going to isolate an act of God out of it's context and not within the larger picture, you are going to stumble right over the truth and not even know it. On it's surface, the atheist is going to balk at a God that kills innocent children. That's how the argument is framed. God is a kille ...[text shortened]... rom human history how lives were sacrificed for the benefit others. Both forced and heroic.
If god created man in a "perfect form and state" then nothing could go wrong. The fact that something went wrong means man was not perfect. The design was inherently flawed, which reflects badly upon the designer. Your god is either an incompetent designer who could do no better, or a capricious one who delights in chaos.
Originally posted by Stregone The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully. ~ Pg. 31
++++++++++++++++++++++++
The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: ..... unforgiving ....
++++++++++++++++++++++
You're impressed with the unforgivingness of God in the Bible?
Originally posted by rwingett If god created man in a "perfect form and state" then nothing could go wrong. The fact that something went wrong means man was not perfect. The design was inherently flawed, which reflects badly upon the designer. Your god is either an incompetent designer who could do no better, or a capricious one who delights in chaos.
Yes, something went wrong. But it wasn't God's doing.
I'm curious. You're an atheist. You reject the bible story as just fiction. Why do you even argue about it? What's more, why do I argue about it if I know we'll get nowhere? This is nuts!
Originally posted by Stregone god, if there is one (or many?), is both good and bad, perhaps? i personally resent someone/something who ultimately (supposedly) has control over me.
Originally posted by scottishinnz What about killing the first-born. What had they done to deserve it?
It's axiomatic with these kinds of believers that any action taken by their god is just. They will concoct wild justifications to convince a skeptic that this is so. When they run out of ideas, they retreat to the "unknown purposes defense" (UPD). There's some very good reason for him conspiring with Satan to kill Job's family or with
The UPD is closely related to the divine right defense. Yahweh is the definition of good and so any thing he does is good and just by definition. Unfortunately, in light of his OT behavior as well as his promised future behavior, this defense does less to explain Yahweh's actions than it does to confuse us about what it means to be good.
Anyway, you've been around here long enough to know how it goes. I lost nearly all interest in this subject about six months ago. It's been refreshing really.
Originally posted by Stregone The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully. ~ Pg. 31
So you don't mind making him more angry I take it? 😉
Good luck with that.
Edit: Thanks for capitalizing the word "God". You know it give us theists a warm feeling inside when we see people doing that.
The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins
23 Jul '07 01:03
Back to Top