This is incontrovertible proof that God is evil. God does not live by his own go

rugadd wrote: I humbly suggest further attempts by our OP writer be redirected to Hannigan.

you know, theres a rule about saying names :laugh:

carlos.martinez3 wrote:
To me if u see a want or need fill it . I do. I'm like that ,

God should have such a moral sense.

Un fortunately, the world has settled for Gods of war instead of Gods of peace.

Regards
DL

Wescli Wardest wrote:

Greatest-I-am wrote:

Wescli Wardest wrote: Part of that teaching is so that mankind understands that being made in God’s image means that we have the ability to choose. There is a law in which mankind is supposed to follow to live in accordance with God’s wishes and salvation of the soul is a choice made by the individual and can only come through love for the creator, the gifts given and the sacrifice that was made for our behalf. Just as a parent allows their children to go and make mistakes, so does the Hebrew God that is mentioned in the Bible.

But, that’s just my understanding of it.

Being made in Yahweh's image would make us all genocidal son murderers.

Why would anyone want to follow such a vile demiurge?

https://vimeo.com/7038401

Regards
DL

I am assuming that you are referring to the final plague set upon the Egyptians by the reference to “son murderers”?

Simo Häyhä has over five hundred confirmed kills to his name in less than one hundred days as a sniper. He was considered to be the deadliest sniper ever. He is also from Finland. So… By that same logic, I would assume you to believe that the Finish people are the most blood thirsty killers in existence.

Perhaps reading, study and trying to understand not only the history of the story but the circumstances, cultures and players involved would shed a more accurate light then reading a sentence and jumping to conclusions.

And of course you could be referring to the actions of those in the past that have claimed the title Christian. And like with all other things I would say that the actions of the individual do not represent the philosophies, ideologies or beliefs or a religion. Just as the actions of individuals do not represent the moral structure of a social or justice system.

I was referring to God having his own son murdered.

You are correct in saying that reading, study and trying to understand not only the history of the story but the circumstances, cultures and players involved would shed a more accurate light then reading a sentence and jumping to conclusions.

I agree that Christians are quite wrong in loving and adoring their genocidal son murdering God.

How they can conclude that Yahweh is a good God is quite a conclusion that Christians have jumped to while ignoring their own stories and myths that show their God to be demonstrably evil.

Regards
DL

OB1Shinobi wrote: i would be very surprised to find out that youre interested in -or capable of- genuine exploration of the ideas relevant to the subject matter
but because i found this interesting and because i found it as a consequence of these threads youve been trolling, and because youve got an affinity with posting youtube videos instead of explaining yourself, i submit this video, "the evolution of god" which explains why god in the bible sometimes says "go eff them up" and why some other times he says "love your neighbor"

Thanks for trolling me with a useless, over an hour long, link.

I use links as an add on and not the way you use them as a full explanation.

I would be very surprised to find out that your interested in -or capable of- genuine exploration of the ideas relevant to the subject matter

Regards
DL

Well, as someone who holds that third parties are not here to represent their ideas or materials, I tend to just ignore them being offered as anything other than a citation to back up the actual substance of the post.
In that spirit, I do disagree that OB1 posts videos as full explanations of his views, and while it may be that he does not always present a case I personally find compelling, I am still waiting to see you present any case at all, GIa. So far, all you did was make big claims without anything to back them up, at times even demonstrably false ones, and then just get hostile or off-topic or both whenever any challenge to them gets raised at all.
In my humble estimation, GIa, I don't feel like you should get to educate OB - or indeed anybody else here - on how to conduct an intellectually honest argument.

Gisteron wrote: Well, as someone who holds that third parties are not here to represent their ideas or materials, I tend to just ignore them being offered as anything other than a citation to back up the actual substance of the post.
In that spirit, I do disagree that OB1 posts videos as full explanations of his views, and while it may be that he does not always present a case I personally find compelling, I am still waiting to see you present any case at all, GIa. So far, all you did was make big claims without anything to back them up, at times even demonstrably false ones, and then just get hostile or off-topic or both whenever any challenge to them gets raised at all.
In my humble estimation, GIa, I don't feel like you should get to educate OB - or indeed anybody else here - on how to conduct an intellectually honest argument.

The O.P. made a judgement based on morality.

Do you have an argument to show that killing, when you are able to cure just as easily, is the moral thing to do?

Let us see your intellectually honest argument.

Regards
DL

You made a moral judgement on a being you don't know exists or has any of the properties you implicitly attributed to it, or does anything based on moral standards you did nothing to establish the applicability of.

And as for your challenge to "show that killing, when you are able to cure just as easily, is the moral thing to do", I'll say this. You don't get to tell me what position to argue. I will never defend one I do not hold. It would be dishonest of me if I did, you see.

I addressed the OP in as much detail as I saw fit at the time, mentioning some of the layers upon layers of fallacious argument and implicit unwarranted assumptions that I saw in it. You shrugged it off at the time and moved on; that's fine. If you find that you have more to add now, feel free to do so. I for one have yet to see you make a valid argument, and your transparent attempt at avoiding that burden by shifting a fake one onto me doesn't quite constitute one. But despair not, for I will take time out of my day to answer your every challenge to what I did say, regardless of whether you answer any challenges to what you said.

Nice that you cannot and will not argue for the other side.

So why are you bothering me?

Regards
DL

You don't get to deside when or what I argue for or against, I do. I have said all I needed to say on the OP so far. If you have a response to what I said, I'm all ears. If not, that's fine, too.


And as for bothering you... You come here (and to half the internet), pester our faiths subforum with threads of nonsense of minimal relevance to most here under highly inflammatory headlines, then get personal and hostile, arguably directly insulting to the few whose responses you don't outright dismiss, then lie about what they say and about what you say, only to get grounds to attack your interlocutors even more, and now you are the victim?

I said nothing about being a victim. I just wondered, since you have nothing to say, why you bothered chasing me around.

Regards
DL

Greatest-I-am wrote: How they can conclude that Yahweh is a good God is quite a conclusion that Christians have jumped to while ignoring their own stories and myths that show their God to be demonstrably evil.

Regards
DL

Wow... :ohmy:

I am actually amazed and stunned by how you have completely you missed the entire message of those passages. To be that far off, one would have to be stretching almost to the point of falsehood to come to such absurd conclusion. It is almost like you are trying to pick a fight with people by purposefully slandering other religions and the people that follow them.

Let me be the first to inform you, that kind behavior is not considered acceptable here. Nor will I tolerate someone trying to pick fights with others or the purposeful slander of other religions, or the personal beliefs of those that hold said beliefs.

I hope this message is clear.

You did say something about being bothered and now "chased" by yours truly, GIa. I'll let the moderators and other readers judge whether I treated you unfairly.
In my opinion you are the one stomping about "picking fights" as Wescli put it, not me. I am responding to you, in detail and in far calmer ways than a few others do, or than you do, or than you deserve, too. I have not enough to say to start an inflammatory threads myself, but I do have enough to be responding to yours, and judging by how in continuing a conversation you either shift goal posts when on topic or move off-topic when you can get away with that, I'd say it is you who is lacking in substantive things to say. If this is not so, feel free to address some of the arguments thrown at you. I'd frankly be happy to be proven wrong about you and get to welcome you here as ever fewer are willing to, I'd wager, at this point, for there can hardly ever be too many interesting people to talk to.

Greatest-I-am wrote: This is incontrovertible proof that God is evil. God does not live by his own golden rule.

God kills when he could just as easily cure. This is irrefutable.

This is a clear violation of the golden rule. The golden rule as articulated by Jesus.

God then is clearly evil.

Do you agree with Jesus that anyone who breaks the golden rule is evil?

Regards
DL

God didn't screw up the world, we did. Death is something that we cause, not God.

Magnus Staar wrote: If by "God" you mean the Abrahamic God, then you should be aware that good and evil are defined by Him, that is, good is his will, evil is anything else.

Which makes anything He does inherently good. He is above the Law.

There is no such thing as above the law in regards to good and evil.

The God of Moses was Moses. Fortunately, God was invisible and never spoke out loud. This made it incredibly easy for someone to simply say that God spoke to them. There were many who didn't believe Moses and for that... he killed them. If all the people willing to exercise free speech were getting killed one can imagine an environment in which everyone who might have protested would have restrained themselves or kept it to private conversation; nothing that would appear in or challenge the bible.

With everything that Jesus said in the NT about hypocrites it is not possible that God himself would, having so much presumed intellect, be a hypocrite and couldn't find non-invasive, non-destructive, non-immoral ways of handling problems. For instance, a solution to the question of where the Hebrews should live... if you were human your mind would be limited to places you know of. If you don't believe God can/will perform miracles then you might have to fight for land. However, if God were real, and making these decisions, why not terraform the desert? Does anyone think the Creator wouldn't be able to turn a desert into a tropical paradise if he chose to? If he parted the Red Sea surely he could create a river and vegetation at will. But what we see in the bible is a Donald Trump like God who is ineffectual at getting his agenda done. So instead he "does evil". Even in doing evil in reaction to humans... what does that do except teach us that war is okay? That capital punishment is okay?