where is he...?????????????????????

Originally posted by josephw
Or, the possibility that you could have the righteousness of God. Imputed to you on the basis of Him having justified you by Christ.
Some people do have a self righteousness. I agree with you on that point. Even a christian can be self righteous. I have been that way too!
Everybody does it somewhere sometime in their life.
Is a person self righteous if they claim their not?

I always view righteousness as self righteousness unless it has a different source other than yourself. Therefore, those who are religious as well as those who are not religious have the capability to be "self righteous" in that they can formulate morality based upon their own desires, beliefs, and whims. Unfortunatly, those who are religious and self righteous claim God as their source of righteousness when, in fact, he may not be.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Is there a difference? The threat of hell is the mind control that drives the search for your brand of 'righteousness'.

The brand of righteousness I am refering to revolves around the command to love. Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind and love your neighbor as yourself. The Bible says that ALL the commandments hang on these two commandments. For example, the Ten commandments come to mind. If you love your neighbor as yourself you will not kill, steal, bear false witness, etc. against them. Likewise, if you love God you will seek to do what pleases him by walking by faith according to what he tells you to do. If you hate the law of love then you will hate the God of the Bible who is said to be the source of all love. Those who hate the God of the Bible simply will say that there is no God and is no hell. Those who love the God of the Bible will believe and accept the God of the Bible thus freeing themselves of such worry. Therefore, there is no mind control, it is free will in motion. Perhaps this is another reason that God does not "prove" himself to people.

Originally posted by whodey
The brand of righteousness I am refering to revolves around the command to love. Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind and love your neighbor as yourself. The Bible says that ALL the commandments hang on these two commandments. For example, the Ten commandments come to mind. If you love your neighbor as yourself you will not kill, ste ...[text shortened]... e will in motion. Perhaps this is another reason that God does not "prove" himself to people.

Those who are rational refuse to accept the genocidal, murderous OT God as a 'source of love'. Same goes for NT Jesus, the inventor of hell. Given the long list of their crimes against humanity, I am really surprised that any human being 'loves' them.

The world already knows that murdering, stealing and bearing false witness are wrong, without the aid of the ten commandments. Of the rest of the ten, five are just plain bad laws.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Those who are rational refuse to accept the genocidal, murderous OT God as a 'source of love'. Same goes for NT Jesus, the inventor of hell. Given the long list of their crimes against humanity, I am really surprised that any human being 'loves' them.

The world already knows that murdering, stealing and bearing false witness are wrong, without the aid of the ten commandments. Of the rest of the ten, five are just plain bad laws.

Easy, boy. There is no need to insult people's belief. You call yourself rational, but this is not very rational. You just end up hurting people who sincerely belive in God and love and respect Jesus. And what does that accomplish, other than raising yor own blood preessure?

Originally posted by Varqa
Easy, boy. There is no need to insult people's belief. You call yourself rational, but this is not very rational. You just end up hurting people who sincerely belive in God and love and respect Jesus. And what does that accomplish, other than raising yor own blood preessure?

Outlandish beliefs deserve scathing criticism. In this case, it is only the Christian's blood that boils, because there is no defense against the charges. Their own bible is the star witness against their God.

I would say that what you are asking of me is like asking someone not to spoil a child's belief in Santa Claus, but Santa Claus has never been accused, much less convicted, of a single murder, let alone genocide. It's sad: Santa has tons more credibility as a "source of love" than the Christian God.

As a former Christian, I can assure you that other believers struggle (often unsuccessfully) to understand these issues. They do not dare speak critically of them to their Christian friends, for fear of being labeled 'backslider' or 'doubting Thomas'. Christians are expected by their brethren to exude an air of arrogance, complete with its tired claim of having cornered the market on absolute truth. Few religions insult and demean other faiths more than Christianity does. This aggressive stance has given them the position of Default Religion in some countries, including mine. It's about time more skeptics started challenging it.

Religion influences how people treat each other, how they act, what kind of laws they make, etc. etc. If a people's religion glorifies genocide, bigotry and murderousness, it will drive their actions towards the same.

Even though I will probably not cause people to turn from their faith, I have nothing to lose and everything to gain by making them at least think critically about some of its tenets.

Originally posted by whodey
So you try and put yourself into God's shoes and see things from his perspective? How about being holy for starters? Think about it for a second. You are God and you know no sin and have never sinned and can never sin. You are a God of love and therefore, only want what is best for your creation. Therefore, your creation must follow your lead to receive ...[text shortened]... believe that there are answers that we are incapable of mentally grasping altogether.

Sorry for this late reply. Been away over the weekends.

OK, so here we are again at a deadlock. I suppose if god does see/know all, he probably knows what he's doing. And since I can't see/know all, I fail to understand some of God's actions. That is fair enough. I guess I simply have to have faith in Him who knows what's best.

But I still don't like being forced to this supposedly pleasant place called heaven. When my daughter was born, I actually had a long interesting chat with my ex-classmate about parenthood. He had three children of his own. I expressed worries on my huge responsibility to bring up my child so that she would grow up to be someone good and do good for other people etc. I dreaded the idea that she'll end up being a criminal or prostitute or the likes. Maybe I would try my very best to avoid that from happenneing. Why? Well, because I really do love my daughter. I hate to see her wasting her life.

But let's just imagine 20 years down the road, my daughter has grown up to be a lazy bum and long dropped out from school. She takes drugs. She has turned into a prostitute. And what's more, she thinks she is happy that way. She thinks that if she were to work in an office drawing high salary, having to give hypocritical praises to her boss each day, then she's be very unhappy. In such a case, what would I do? Well, I'd probably try my best to nag each day, trying to make her find that 'proper' job in the office that she hates so much. She probably won't listen anyway, but I will keep on trying.

Then one day she comes home totally haggard; no money; no friends; nothing to her name. She still insists that she's happy with her life, but needs a shelter 'for the time being' while she finds ways on how to continue this happy life of hers. Would I then take her in?

I think I would be really pissed with her. But in the end, I think I would take her in. I won't be happy for it, but I would still love my daughter. Because only then can I claim that my love for my daughter is genuine and unconditional. I don't think that I will say since my daughter didn't love me, I would throw her out of my house.

But God's love to us is not the same. His love is with the condition that we love him back-- unconditionally. Only if you follow him on blind faith without questioning his decisions; only if you love him and put him the highest amongst everything else; only if you are willing to sacrifice everything for him, will he love you back. And only then will he welcome you into his kingdom. Otherwise, he will tell you, "Oh so sorry son, you didn't obey me, so now go to hell; it's your choice!".

But then again, that's only me. That's how much I love my daughter. I try very hard to see into the future, 20 years from now; 30 years from now. If I live to be 70, and my daughter will be in her thirties, she will always be my baby girl. Is my love for my daughter any different when compared to God's love for us all?

Originally posted by josephw
whodey,
That was masterful. I agree with you on every point. I enjoyed reading every word. Thankyou.

This may come as a surprise to you, but I find his posts also very good. And I too enjoy reading it. The discussions I am having with him are 'meaningful' in my opinion. Unlike those strange discussions I have with dj2becker.

Originally posted by eatmybishop
jammer... if you dont have anything consrtuctive to say then why say it?

Haha - you don't know him very well, do you?!

Originally posted by ckoh1965
Sorry for this late reply. Been away over the weekends.

OK, so here we are again at a deadlock. I suppose if god does see/know all, he probably knows what he's doing. And since I can't see/know all, I fail to understand some of God's actions. That is fair enough. I guess I simply have to have faith in Him who knows what's best.

But I still don't like for my daughter any different when compared to God's love for us all?

I don't know if you realize this but your hypothetical story about your daughter mirrors that of the prodigal son Jesus taught. The only real criterea is coming home, God will then receive you with open arms no matter where you have been or what you have done. That is, as long as you will to come home he will take you back in. You see, the father in the prodigal son story never stopped loving his son as well. He just prayed every day that his son would return to him so that he could take him back once again as his son.

Originally posted by whodey
I don't know if you realize this but your hypothetical story about your daughter mirrors that of the prodigal son Jesus taught. The only real criterea is coming home, God will then receive you with open arms no matter where you have been or what you have done. That is, as long as you will to come home he will take you back in. You see, the father in the pr ...[text shortened]... very day that his son would return to him so that he could take him back once again as his son.

Thank you for your patience with me, whodey. Your answer is certainly different from that of RBHILL. But I am inclined to have more faith that your answer is probably more logical and sensible. I'm not saying that I believe it to be the absolute truth! But if there is really a god, and if indeed the bible is the message from god, then maybe your explanation is closer to the mark.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Those who are rational refuse to accept the genocidal, murderous OT God as a 'source of love'. Same goes for NT Jesus, the inventor of hell. Given the long list of their crimes against humanity, I am really surprised that any human being 'loves' them.

The world already knows that murdering, stealing and bearing false witness are wrong, without the aid of the ten commandments. Of the rest of the ten, five are just plain bad laws.

I think every Christian has struggled with the God of love who is also a God of judgement. How can he love and punish at the same time? However, you know that if you are a parent and do not punish your child when needed, you are doing your child no favors and, in fact, you are doing far more harm to them by not punishing appropriatly than by demanding that they be accountable for their actions.

When you mention genocide I assume you refer to such events as God's destruction of Soddom and Ghommora and the conquest of the Holy Land. However, if God be a holy and just God, must he not judge and destroy sin? As I said before, sin is the corrosive element that causes God's creation to suffer, therefore it will be destroyed one way or another if he truly is a God of love who desires the best for his creation. The only real question is will we be destroyed along with it if we choose to cling to that sin. The amazing thing to me is that God showed Adam and Eve mercy by allowing them to continue to live despite rejecting him when they allowed sin to enter their lives. He told them that if they partook of the fuit they would die. By all rights then God could have destroyed them the instant they sinned thus destroying all of makind yet he chose not to. Looking at things from this perspective you might say that everything else good mankind recieved from God is and was based upon his mercy and grace.

Having said that, it appears to me that God saw something "salvagable" in makind because he chose to spare Adam and Eve. All was not lost even though many would be lost as a result of the fall. It seems, however, that here is a line to be drawn in the sand when it comes to wickedness. If you read the story of Sodom and Ghommora, you will see the extent of the wickedness of the people who lived in the city. When some male strangers came to visit Lot, who was the nephew of Abraham, the men in the city surrounded his house and demanded the strangers come out so that they could rape them. Had an angel not made them all go blind, I dare say they would have broken down his door and seized the men and raped them and probably killed them in the process. I think such a civilization had spiraled down to a point of no return in the eyes of God. In fact, had he allowed them to continue to live they may have spread such wickedness to other people. Therefore, I think God destroyed them out of a percieved necessity for the better good of humanity. I don't think it was something he enjoyed doing.

I think the hardest aspect to all of this are the conquests of the Holy Land. It is the only time in the Bible where men where told to kill other men by God himself instead of the hand of God coming down and inflicting judgement himself. To be fair, however, should we not peer closer into the reasons behind God's actions? If you look in Wiki concerning the history of the Holy Land, the Shemites were the original inhabitants. A hint to this fact can be seen in Genesis, however, most of the history is reflected in other ancient Semitic writings not in the Bible. I think Genesis was written with the assumption of such ancient knowledge. After the flood, each son of Noah inherited sections of land to possess. However, the Canaanites decided that their inheritance was not enough so they conquered and drove the Shemites out of the Holy Land. Thus the sons of Caanan decided to have a little genocide all their own courtesy of the Shemites. The Shemites survivors, however, happen to be the ancestors of the Israelites, thus the Israelites were the rightful owners of the Land. You might then say that the Mosaic law of "an eye for an eye" applied to this situation. Granted, the idea of a genocide for a genocide seems a bit harsh, but it may have been part of the justification for such an action. It would also help explain why he had the Israelites carry out the conquest just as if someone had personally wronged an Israelite, that person would then be told to turn around and do the same to the person that wronged them. Also keep in mind that God's ultimate goal was to bring the Messiah into the world so that all of his creation could be redeemed from sin. This could only be done via the establishment of the nation of Israel. Therefore, I think there to be a parellel to the Canaanite and Israelite blood that was shed in the conquest of the Holy Land to that of Christ's own blood being spilled for all of mankind. I dare say God loved the Canaanites whom he slew just as much as he loved his own Son whom he slew. Both, although not desirable by themselves, had to be accomplished with the ultimate goal to redeem all of mankind to himself.

This leads us to the era of grace. Christ taught that he was the answer to sin. Through him the sinner need not be destroyed to stop the sin from spreading within society as seen in Mosaic law because he had the power to deliver us from the sin in our lives. This can be seen as he spared the woman caught in adultery. By Mosaic law, she should have been stoned. However, Christ showed her mercy and spared her life and then delivered her from her sins. Christ taught that he who sinned became a servant of sin. However, Christ alone has the power to free us of those chains. This is and was God's ultimate goal and that is to destroy the sin but spare the sinner.

I hope this helps you see a different perspective regarding the matter. However, you might like to know that despite me seeing justifications for such harsh actions carried out by God as I have laid out before you, it is still hard for me to grapple with the notion that God can be so harsh at times when it comes to judging sin as seen even towards his own Son on the cross. I guess being a sinner myself makes it harder to digest. My perspective is often skewed as a result of me not grasping the severity of sin in my own life as it appears in the eyes of a holy God. To me sin may be "no big deal" simply because it is familiar to me. However, to a holy God sin is not familiar in any form and he sees it as repugnant and ultimatly something that brings death.

Originally posted by IAI
Jammer still has nightmares about the day an IED killed the lone ranger.

Actually, the nightmare that gets me every time is the one where your Mother drops her veil and finally shows her face.

That's when I began to understand why you make them wear those things.

Butt-ugly .. actually camelbutt-ugly

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Outlandish beliefs deserve scathing criticism. In this case, it is only the Christian's blood that boils, because there is no defense against the charges. Their own bible is the star witness against their God.

I would say that what you are asking of me is like asking someone not to spoil a child's belief in Santa Claus, but Santa Claus has never be ...[text shortened]... everything to gain by making them at least think critically about some of its tenets.

At one time I was that mad at God too.

It was Christmas 1955 and I didn't get that pony I asked for and i wasted 3 weeks being good too.

It was God that did it to me. I was sure of it. I had prayed for that pony .. hard.

It's always Gods fault when things go bad ... all the good stuff I deserved so God wasn't responsible for that.

Everything wrong in my life must be Gods doing because I don't deserve it.

Waaah waaah sob whine .. I want a pony.
My lifes not perfect .. so screw God.
................


sound familiar?

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Those who are rational refuse to accept the genocidal, murderous OT God as a 'source of love'. Same goes for NT Jesus, the inventor of hell. Given the long list of their crimes against humanity, I am really surprised that any human being 'loves' them.

The world already knows that murdering, stealing and bearing false witness are wrong, without the aid of the ten commandments. Of the rest of the ten, five are just plain bad laws.

You seem to acknowledge that God exists.
He just hasn't done things the way you think he ought to. Hasn't loved you enough, hasn't provided you with a perfect life.

Sounds like a bitter pill to swallow .. having God not live up to your expectations.

I understand perfectly, the prick never sent the pony either.

Maybe if you go in the corner and hold your breath God will recognize just what a fine human you really are.