"If God Exists...x shouldn't happen" argument

[VCR_CAT]

An omnipotent being that is also benevolent would not need to create plagues to facilitate positive change; it could just will it so. So, it is not omnibenevolent and still not deserving of worship.

 

This... is honestly a very weak argument, you realize this, yes? You're making a great many assumptions as to what would be best, what is objectively good for everyone, or rather what a God would need to do. Your argument began as "God is not God because he does not fit my definition" and has evolved her to "God is not omnibenevolent because he did not do what I think he should have."

 

For one, keep in mind that the God we are talking about and that I believe in is not an emotionless robot who has to conduct himself according to a specific definition or of inputs/outputs. As well, remember the last post I made in response to Vla1ne, in which Jesus is dying on the cross and a lot of people are slandering him saying "If you really are the Son of God, then why don't you save yourself?" and how such slander goes in line with "If he really is God, then why didn't he just take the easy route?" The simple answer is, again, God works in mysterious ways and that there's a big picture that we cannot see. The longer answer, as I also address in greater detail in a previous post, goes about the nature of the Biblical message of redemption and how often a greater good cannot be accomplished without being in a darker place.

 

Finally: Do you know the objective greater good for everyone? Do you know what would have been absolutely best for all of humanity for all of time to really know that because X happened it means that God is not omnibenevolent? 

[Delibirb]

This... is honestly a very weak argument, you realize this, yes? You're making a great many assumptions as to what would be best, what is objectively good for everyone, or rather what a God would need to do. Your argument began as "God is not God because he does not fit my definition" and has evolved her to "God is not omnibenevolent because he did not do what I think he should have."

 

For one, keep in mind that the God we are talking about and that I believe in is not an emotionless robot who has to conduct himself according to a specific definition or of inputs/outputs. As well, remember the last post I made in response to Vla1ne, in which Jesus is dying on the cross and a lot of people are slandering him saying "If you really are the Son of God, then why don't you save yourself?" and how such slander goes in line with "If he really is God, then why didn't he just take the easy route?" The simple answer is, again, God works in mysterious ways and that there's a big picture that we cannot see. The longer answer, as I also address in greater detail in a previous post, goes about the nature of the Biblical message of redemption and how often a greater good cannot be accomplished without being in a darker place.

 

Finally: Do you know the objective greater good for everyone? Do you know what would have been absolutely best for all of humanity for all of time to really know that because X happened it means that God is not omnibenevolent? 

I don't often attribute weakness to logic.

 

And I don't need to know definitively what the greater good of humanity is to know that an omnipotent being that truly wanted to be benevolent would have willed into existence a method of achieving whatever goal it had for us without suffering. "God works in mysterious ways" is not an argument against this, if anything it's an argument for it. Perhaps your God does work in mysterious ways; all the more reason I don't feel He deserves my worship. If He is unwilling to be open with His methods or rules for intervening, consistently and presently, I do not find any benevolence in His work and would much rather continue to believe He is a mere force without thought, which cannot comprehend the ways in which it influences the world. Because the alternative is He is vain and cruel, and I truly don't want that to be true.

[Tinkerer]

Here's my breakdown of it:

 

God wants a relationship with us. That is His goal. That is also the message of Christianity.

 

As an eternal father, what He wants for us is the best: an eternity in relationship with Him.

 

The caveat is that God gave us choice and by doing so gave us the ability to choose incorrectly. The consequences of the first wrong choice was sin and death being brought into the world. From that choice does all negatively stem in general.

 

As for specific occurrences: plagues, disease, etc. it is from the fact we're living in a fallen world (again, caused by the first incorrect choice) and any that impact our lives is because God allows it to, not as a cause.

 

There are four main reasons for why God allows these things:

1. As a form of testing

2. As a form of chastising

3. As a form of bringing one to faith

The fourth one is simply that we don't know, but it progresses God's eternal plan. It may sound like a cop-out, but that is a point that's emphasized several times in the Bible: God is simply too much for us to fully understand on this side of the grave.

 

Personally, I would have to look at it in the opposite manner: If there is no God, why aren't there more bad things?

[Delibirb]

Here's my breakdown of it:

 

God wants a relationship with us. That is His goal. That is also the message of Christianity.

 

As an eternal father, what He wants for us is the best: an eternity in relationship with Him.

 

The caveat is that God gave us choice and by doing so gave us the ability to choose incorrectly. The consequences of the first wrong choice was sin and death being brought into the world. From that choice does all negatively stem in general.

 

As for specific occurrences: plagues, disease, etc. it is from the fact we're living in a fallen world (again, caused by the first incorrect choice) and any that impact our lives is because God allows it to, not as a cause.

 

There are four main reasons for why God allows these things:

1. As a form of testing

2. As a form of chastising

3. As a form of bringing one to faith

The fourth one is simply that we don't know, but it progresses God's eternal plan. It may sound like a cop-out, but that is a point that's emphasized several times in the Bible: God is simply too much for us to fully understand on this side of the grave.

 

Personally, I would have to look at it in the opposite manner: If there is no God, why aren't there more bad things?

Such a being sounds vain. And distancing Himself doesn't help His case.

 

Also, giving an infant a choice between a cookie and an apple doesn't mean you get to punish them for taking the cookie. Especially if you're omniscient and knew they would take the cookie, and/or are omnipotent and could have made both choices apples, or given them the choice when they weren't an infant. Even if you don't directly punish the infant, but, say, don't buy it new toys when it inevitably breaks the ones it has, specifically because they took the cookie that one time, that is still vain and not benevolent. Even if you give the infant a screwdriver to fix its toys and expect it to know what that even is, let alone use it to fix the toy itself, that is vain.

 

A being that created a species and could have put it on the right track from the get-go, rather than give it an arbitrary, infantile decision that would dictate whether He invests any guidance or even presence at all, or cruelty and divine wrath, is not omnibenevolent, and is not a God that should have His egotistical demands be met.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

It is a pleasant surprise to see many of you whom I wouldn't assume would take up the mantle of "God's advocate" doing just that. God indeed works in mysterious ways! 

 

God's omnibenevolence, omniscience, and omnipotence imply everything is always going just as planned. There really isn't any evil, just people who lose faith in sight of immediate predicaments. 

 

Take a look at something like this, for example: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/List_of_mistakes_made_by_God claiming to catalogue God's mistakes. Many of the points listed are trivial issues to begin with. Assuming they were God's mistakes is playing God as well as pessimistic and judgemental - two qualities that seldom end as well for us in the short or long-term as optimism and being chill. 

[vla1ne]

That's your choice. If you don't want to follow Christianity then that's your decision to make. Our faith isn't meant to be just a legalistic set of rules; it's meant to be more relational and personal than that. This is why the language in the Bible when it speaks of God and Israel uses language of family or of marriage; describing Israel as the bride as its image of choice. A relationship doesn't work if it's forced, and if you don't want to follow it that's fine.

 

As for what happens? You live your life, and then you die. As for what happens when you die, it's not very clear what the sort of "judgment process" is, although we're given an image of a convicted criminal in the midst of execution with no religious ties repenting to Jesus, whom replies "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise." I believe that even in death, people will be given the chance to repent. I also believe that there are people that will still refuse to do that. As for those people, I'm sure you can connect the dots.

 

 

 

From the rest of the passage I just quoted:

 

"35 And the people stood by, looking on. And even the rulers were sneering at Him, saying, "He saved others; let Him save Himself if this is the Christ of God, His Chosen One." 36 The soldiers also mocked Him, coming up to Him, offering Him sour wine, 37 and saying, "If You are the King of the Jews, save Yourself!" 38 Now there was also an inscription above Him, "THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS." 39 One of the criminals who were hanged there was hurling abuse at Him, saying, "Are You not the Christ? Save Yourself and us!"

 

It's almost poetic how those words of insult parallel with your criticism, and I'm not saying this to be insulting or anything. Of course it would be easier to do it the easy way, but he doesn't. Remember how the Bible is a narrative of redemption and reconciliation, and there was more to having Israel fight for their land than simply just being given it than one might think. Also, regarding "not caring", it was commanded that the Israels present every city they attacked with an opportunity for peace; there's also a lot of the picture on the Canaanite side that's not seen because the Bible only tells one side of the story.

 

As for it being the Canaanite's land, no. Not exactly. The ancestors of Israel lived there long before the Canaanites, but were hit with a seven year famine. They fled to Egypt, where Jacob's son, Joseph, had managed to become a very high ranking individual in the Egyptian government despite being betrayed by his brothers and sold to slavery. There Jacob's people are given a place to live in Egypt until years later when the new Pharaoh doesn't think these Hebrews living in their land deserve the good treatment they're getting (and I'm sure you're familiar with the story of Exodus and the Hebrew's return to Canaan).

 

Also, one may argue that God did make a promised land for them, which was Canaan. It needed to be that land for a few reasons. For one, in those ancient times, there was tremendous fear and taboo regarding deep waters. Throughout their literature oceans and seas are used as metaphors for chaos and evil, and nobody practiced sailing at that time. Two, the land of Canaan is a strip of fertile land surrounded by desert that essentially bridges Egypt and other more southern kingdoms to the northern kingdoms and beyond. Three, Egypt was one of the most wealthy and influential countries at the time, from which there's going to be a lot of traffic to and from. Canaan was in a position where anyone that wanted to go to Egypt essentially had to go through Canaan, and with Israel given a mission to spread their faith to the world there's really no better place for exposure to many different cultures and places than Canaan.

that's not the response your god has though. your god kills off those who don't follow him in many a verse, or torments them, eternally. what exactly makes that a proper address? eternal punishment for finite actions, is never an equal scale. how about you let people live their lives, and just leave them alone after death? that would be like me being sent to canada, and getting shot for jaywalking, except i'd get shot forever. your god has zero right to either judge or punish my actions. nor have i done even one thing deserving of eternal punishment. (i've done quite a few things that i think should earn me a good punch in the face, but nothing beyond).

 

i never said easy way, i could not care less about what your god wants, my statement to your god is more along the lines of "leave me alone, neither of us owes the other a damn thing, and i refuse to be subjected to any of your whims." and that's after granting an existence which hasn't even been earned. i don't mind that my life has difficulty, because the world as it is now, looks exactly like i'd expect a world *without* god(s) to look. assuming your god exists, i don't want anything to do with him or his machinations, be they jesus, lucifer, or anything else.

 

the story of exodus was god hardening the pharaohs heart, and needlessly killing off hundreds, if not thousands of people. funny thing about that exodus was that moses initially said it was a religious observance, and until your god made him say no, the pharaoh was going to actually allow it, but for whatever reason, instead of allowing it, your god instigated, and executed, all the plagues. in other words, your god was a dick, and killed thousands more than he needed to for no defined reason.

 

your god, is supposedly omnipotent, in fact, on the way to said promised land, he literally killed off thousands of the hebrew people supernaturally, so i don't buy the fertile land stint. he could have made their land anywhere he wanted, and even short of that could have easily relocated the Canaanites to another land with zero effort and zero bodies. this is what i'm getting at, nothing that your god does, implies all-powerful, all knowing, or all loving. in fact, he doesn't even need to be all loving, he just needs to have a moral compass that's not darker than jeffrey dahmer. i have criteria for worship, and nothing i've read of your god, leads me to believe that he is, by any means, worth worshiping. if he existed, i would never want to cross paths with him. your god's actions, and inaction's, speak volumes about his character, and little, if any of said character, is within range of worship.

[~~~~]

God wants a relationship with us. That is His goal. That is also the message of Christianity.

He's omniscient, so he knows my number. If he wants a relationship with me, he can phone me, not play with me or be vague with me. I do not take very well to communication that isn't

1. Plain speakin' and clear. No metaphors, no rhetorical questions, no maxims. A lil' bit of sarcasm maybe, but otherwise no.
2. Accessible. I can read, but I lose focus if it's not gripping. I couldn't make it through VCR's paragraphs, nevermind the funking bible. Also, no audiotapes lol.

And god knows this, right? He in fact made me that way.

 

 

As an eternal father, what He wants for us is the best: an eternity in relationship with Him.

 

Well what if I don't??? I want an eternity to be left alone with my thoughts. Again, he knows this.

 

 

The caveat is that God gave us choice and by doing so gave us the ability to choose incorrectly.

funk that! Why should he get to put me between his sucky heaven (which in book of revelations is stated that out of all of humanity only 100k people get into), and hell? It's my eternity, and I should get a proper choice, not the threat of possible eternal torture.

 

If you love someone, you don't ever bring up the possibility that you might torture them against their consent! C'mon, even if god didn't love me, someone with a slight shred of decency would make the right choice be heaven and the wrong choice would be something worse, but not hell. Just leave me on Earth for funk's sake! Let me explore space for billions of years like I want to!

 

 

The consequences of the first wrong choice was sin and death being brought into the world. From that choice does all negatively stem in general.

 

As for specific occurrences: plagues, disease, etc. it is from the fact we're living in a fallen world (again, caused by the first incorrect choice) and any that impact our lives is because God allows it to, not as a cause.

Ohh. So Adam and Eve screwed it up for the rest of us? Why should that impact anyone other than Adam or Eve? Why should babies be dying of cholera because some idiots 6000 years ago ate an apple? That sounds unjust.

 

 

There are four main reasons for why God allows these things:

1. As a form of testing

2. As a form of chastising

3. As a form of bringing one to faith

The fourth one is simply that we don't know, but it progresses God's eternal plan. It may sound like a cop-out, but that is a point that's emphasized several times in the Bible: God is simply too much for us to fully understand on this side of the grave.

1. He's omniscient. He already knows the result of the test and therefore doesn't have to perform it.
2. Not his place. A justice system needs to be transparent. He can bow to our human systems or be classed as a vigilante.
3. Jerk
4. Requires trust which quite simply has to be earned.

 

Personally, I would have to look at it in the opposite manner: If there is no God, why aren't there more bad things?

I personally don't believe that there is anything more powerful that the world's leaders that is explicitly 'out to get us'. I don't believe in Satan, Cthulhu or anything else that should make life any worse than predicted by a naturalistic view of the world. And some seriously bad things do happen. Talk to people, hear their stories. The world is funking brutal place, seriously.

[Halubaris Maphotika]

There is evil in the world because God gave us free will.

 

The idea of Heaven and Hell was created in order to influence man's decisions, but not force them to do anything. Human's can still do whatever they want, but there are consequences.

 

By interfering in our affairs after all the sheet he put his son through, it would be a detriment to what Jesus died for. Jesus died to show the world that there are consequences to every action and that God can give those who live righteous lives a paradise after death. Still Jesus was fairly the last time that God ever really interfered in human affairs to such a degree, as his death was meant to show the humans the truth and have them work things out from there.

 

God understands the horrors of this world, but he cannot intervene because it would destroy the concept of free will on earth. These are problems that we bring upon ourselves and God can only provide solace in the afterlife.

 

Now I would not dare to presume to know what God is thinking. God train of thought is beyond our comprehension as mere humans, but, given the texts of the Bible, I can surmise this as one of the main reasons.

[·Toot]

God is a concept by which we measure our pain. 

[~~~~]

It is a pleasant surprise to see many of you whom I wouldn't assume would take up the mantle of "God's advocate" doing just that. God indeed works in mysterious ways! 

 

God's omnibenevolence, omniscience, and omnipotence imply everything is always going just as planned. There really isn't any evil, just people who lose faith in sight of immediate predicaments. 

 

Take a look at something like this, for example: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/List_of_mistakes_made_by_God claiming to catalogue God's mistakes. Many of the points listed are trivial issues to begin with. Assuming they were God's mistakes is playing God as well as pessimistic and judgemental - two qualities that seldom end as well for us in the short or long-term as optimism and being chill. 

Or or or: 

[spoiler=maybe just maybe]ur just wrong, god doesn't exist and there is no magic excuse

 

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Or maybe you're one of God's mistakes. 

[vla1ne]

There is evil in the world because God gave us free will.

 

The idea of Heaven and Hell was created in order to influence man's decisions, but not force them to do anything. Human's can still do whatever they want, but there are consequences.

 

By interfering in our affairs after all the s*** he put his son through, it would be a detriment to what Jesus died for. Jesus died to show the world that there are consequences to every action and that God can give those who live righteous lives a paradise after death. Still Jesus was fairly the last time that God ever really interfered in human affairs to such a degree, as his death was meant to show the humans the truth and have them work things out from there.

 

God understands the horrors of this world, but he cannot intervene because it would destroy the concept of free will on earth. These are problems that we bring upon ourselves and God can only provide solace in the afterlife.

 

Now I would not dare to presume to know what God is thinking. God train of thought is beyond our comprehension as mere humans, but, given the texts of the Bible, I can surmise this as one of the main reasons.

here's the thing, most of us never asked for, or wanted, said choices. we just want to be left alone. i don't need a sky daddy, nor do i need a figure to worship. i help others of my own will, no god needed, and i want to keep it that way, before and after death. as speedroid said, if he wanted to talk to me, he knows what it would take to make me believe in him, and what it would take for me to worship him, the fact that neither of those criteria has been met, implies he does not care one iota for me, and i'm fine with that. so long as he remains consistent, and keeps himself, and his pet devil, far out of my life.

 

you do not destroy free will by revealing yourself, in fact, the concepts of heaven and hell, were created BY him, so there is even less reason for him to not step in and say hello should he desire it.  heaven and hell would never be detriments to free will. if god was to literally force people to act in a certain manner, that would be the only criteria for removal of free will. god or no god, my actions will not change. the only thing that would change, would be the amount, and variety, of religion-based crimes.

 

Or maybe you're one of God's mistakes.

so we're at least in agreement that your god's not perfect?

[Delibirb]

There is evil in the world because God gave us free will.

 

The idea of Heaven and Hell was created in order to influence man's decisions, but not force them to do anything. Human's can still do whatever they want, but there are consequences.

 

By interfering in our affairs after all the s*** he put his son through, it would be a detriment to what Jesus died for. Jesus died to show the world that there are consequences to every action and that God can give those who live righteous lives a paradise after death. Still Jesus was fairly the last time that God ever really interfered in human affairs to such a degree, as his death was meant to show the humans the truth and have them work things out from there.

 

God understands the horrors of this world, but he cannot intervene because it would destroy the concept of free will on earth. These are problems that we bring upon ourselves and God can only provide solace in the afterlife.

 

Now I would not dare to presume to know what God is thinking. God train of thought is beyond our comprehension as mere humans, but, given the texts of the Bible, I can surmise this as one of the main reasons.

Why do there need to be consequences associated with free will, if not to give God a reason to remain "around"? This explanation makes it sound like God just wants to feel important, so made up silly rules to go along with his free will. Which, is still vain.

 

Your God, having created everything and being omnipotent, created consequences in the first place, or at least didn't get rid of them when, in His omniscience, he would have recognized they had no omnibenevolent purpose.

 

Free will probably doesn't exist anyway, though that's a whole other subject. If God "can" or "will" only provide solace in the afterlife, I don't think He's deserving of any affection in life.

[Halubaris Maphotika]

 

here's the thing, most of us never asked for, or wanted, said choices. we just want to be left alone. i don't need a sky daddy, nor do i need a figure to worship. i help others of my own will, no god needed, and i want to keep it that way, before and after death. as speedroid said, if he wanted to talk to me, he knows what it would take to make me believe in him, and what it would take for me to worship him, the fact that neither of those criteria has been met, implies he does not care one iota for me, and i'm fine with that. so long as he remains consistent, and keeps himself, and his pet devil, far out of my life.

 

you do not destroy free will by revealing yourself, in fact, the concepts of heaven and hell, were created BY him, so there is even less reason for him to not step in and say hello should he desire it. heaven and hell would never be detriments to free will. if god was to literally force people to act in a certain manner, that would be the only criteria for removal of free will. god or no god, my actions will not change. the only thing that would change, would be the amount, and variety, of religion-based crimes.

I am not going to attempt to try and have you believe in God, that is pointless. I can say that God simply rewards the righteous. You do not have to believe in him to go to heaven, just be a good person. To be fair, the world we live in right now was not the original idea of humanity. Originally the concept of sin and pain was absent because we primal humans were completely oblivious to it. However, after Eve ate from the tree of knowledge, the negative concepts of sin and the true revelations of who they were came flooding in. By providing Heaven and Hell, God is providing some assistance to our world in as distant of a capacity as he can. To be fair, he has left you alone. By not revealing himself or interfering in your life, he is doing what you wanted. He wants you to live the life you want to live, but don't use it to ruin the lives of others. He may allow you to do so in the human realm, but in Heaven there will be punishment.

 

 

Why do there need to be consequences associated with free will, if not to give God a reason to remain "around"? This explanation makes it sound like God just wants to feel important, so made up silly rules to go along with his free will. Which, is still vain.

 

Your God, having created everything and being omnipotent, created consequences in the first place, or at least didn't get rid of them when, in His omniscience, he would have recognized they had no omnibenevolent purpose.

 

Free will probably doesn't exist anyway, though that's a whole other subject. If God "can" or "will" only provide solace in the afterlife, I don't think He's deserving of any affection in life.

There must be consequences because, if not, many humans will run rampant and cause chaos. By eating from the Tree of Knowledge, free will was given unto us. God created us and loves us, the last thing he wants is our own free will causing the murder and rape of the innocent to the benefit of the evil. To interfere with his presence would be very detrimental to his overall concept of faith and free will, because it implies there was no choice at all. He wants you to have the free will to believe in him or not. Also, nobody said that God wasn't vain. He is a jealous God among other things.

[Dad]

Viv.  Please don't double post.  Edit your posts instead.  Thank you.

[Halubaris Maphotika]

Viv.  Please don't double post.  Edit your posts instead.  Thank you.

Yeah I tried, but I couldn't get the quote to go in the edit for some reason. THen when I posted it it posted as a double post instead.

[vla1ne]

I am not going to attempt to try and have you believe in God, that is pointless. I can say that God simply rewards the righteous. You do not have to believe in him to go to heaven, just be a good person. To be fair, the world we live in right now was not the original idea of humanity. Originally the concept of sin and pain was absent because we primal humans were completely oblivious to it. However, after Eve ate from the tree of knowledge, the negative concepts of sin and the true revelations of who they were came flooding in. By providing Heaven and Hell, God is providing some assistance to our world in as distant of a capacity as he can. To be fair, he has left you alone. By not revealing himself or interfering in your life, he is doing what you wanted. He wants you to live the life you want to live, but don't use it to ruin the lives of others. He may allow you to do so in the human realm, but in Heaven there will be punishment.

 

 

 

There must be consequences because, if not, many humans will run rampant and cause chaos. By eating from the Tree of Knowledge, free will was given unto us. God created us and loves us, the last thing he wants is our own free will causing the murder and rape of the innocent to the benefit of the evil. To interfere with his presence would be very detrimental to his overall concept of faith and free will, because it implies there was no choice at all. He wants you to have the free will to believe in him or not. Also, nobody said that God wasn't vain. He is a jealous God among other things.

two things, first, your first claim is directly contradicted by jesus, who states, (and has been supported in his claim by pastors and preachers for decades) that none shall enter heaven without believing in him (he is himself god, so the claim is akin to stating that heaven's locked off to nonbelievers)  the original idea of humanity was not ruined by you, or i, or any of humanity to follow adam and eve, in fact, even adam and eve, were not at fault, your god allowed all the parameters for said fall in the book, omniscience would mean that was the intent from the start, and without omniscience, it implies a devastating lack of both forethought, and power. because even past said event, your god could not fix the flaw, which honestly was less of a flaw, and more of an awakening for humanity. if a parent leaves a knife within the reach of a child, is the child to blame for touching the knife? no, it is the parents fault, and that same rule applies to god and eve. eve knew nothing at the time of eating the apple, neither good nor sin, she is guiltless in any sense, whereas your god knew, even if he were not omniscient, how eating said apple would end, and clearly knew that he would be incapable of fixing the result should his children harm themselves with the shiny knife apple. in other words, by the words of your book this is our punishment for god's mistake.

 

as for your god and his punishment, i don't want to be in heaven, nor do i want to be in hell, i simply want him to leave me alone. forever,(own universe optional) even after i die, i want nothing to do with your god. can he not do something as simple as that?

 

 

is that not free will? free will, is letting humans do as they will, it does not go both ways, if you want to give somebody free will, you do not then, in the next breath, attempt to punish them for exercising said will. it is up to humans, to judge humans, not a god. and beyond even that, what you have just said, is basically that god didn't want humans to have free will, (it was forbidden to humans) lastly, vanity is a fatal flaw when it comes to dieties that i'm looking to worship. if you're a vain being, then i will never, in any capacity, worship you, because it means you don't actually care about me, but about how i can make you look good.

[Delibirb]

There must be consequences because, if not, many humans will run rampant and cause chaos. By eating from the Tree of Knowledge, free will was given unto us. God created us and loves us, the last thing he wants is our own free will causing the murder and rape of the innocent to the benefit of the evil. To interfere with his presence would be very detrimental to his overall concept of faith and free will, because it implies there was no choice at all. He wants you to have the free will to believe in him or not. Also, nobody said that God wasn't vain. He is a jealous God among other things.

That's not quite how free will works. You don't get to say "You can do whatever you want but if you do a thing that I said isn't cool, or didn't say isn't cool, you're gonna burn alive forever." and call that free will. If a being of such incomprehensible power, knowledge, and love wanted us to have free will, it wouldn't come with asterisks based on what you do with it. That's sick.

 

I return to the infant analogy: you can't tell an infant that you'll let it do whatever it wants, but if it breaks any of its toys from now until it turns 18, you will kick it out at that time with no money or resources. Even if that infant makes it 18 years without breaking a toy, it will resent you, and it is totally justified in doing so. It's essentially enslavement, except in the case of your God, it appears to be entirely for His amusement.

 

If you want to raise anything, with free will, to be good and upstanding, you need to be involved in personally showing it what to do and giving it consequences that scale to the misbehavior. Anything that claims to care, that claims to be omnibenevolent, that demands to be worshiped, would have to understand that. And since your God is omniscient, it does understand that, and chooses to be a passive-aggressive, cruel, tyrannical child.

 

An insentient force is much more reasonable to ascribe to. It doesn't have to explain why there is evil or consequences or unfairness, because it doesn't know or understand, it just exists, and exerts.

[Tinkerer]

I'll try to break it down, point by point.

 

that's not the response your god has though. your god kills off those who don't follow him in many a verse, or torments them, eternally. what exactly makes that a proper address? eternal punishment for finite actions, is never an equal scale. how about you let people live their lives, and just leave them alone after death? that would be like me being sent to canada, and getting shot for jaywalking, except i'd get shot forever. your god has zero right to either judge or punish my actions. nor have i done even one thing deserving of eternal punishment. (i've done quite a few things that i think should earn me a good punch in the face, but nothing beyond).

 

God kills off those that don't follow Him in quite a number of verses.  Yes, as harsh as that may seem, it is true.  "Sin" is not doing as God has prescribed and the consequence of sin is death.  What God knows that we do not is the result of keeping those people alive.  In God's character, if the person would have later turned to Him, would they have died?  Probably not.

 

Does God eternally torment?  No.  It doesn't say that He is doing the tormenting.  Have you considered that what we call "hell" is simply the complete absence of God's presence?  Though I admit, I do not know, it is possible that the eternal torture is simply the result of being out of God's presence, not any action dictated by God himself.

 

In terms of "right", it is simply creator's right.  If you drew a picture, do you have the right to toss it in a fire when you're done?

 

 

i never said easy way, i could not care less about what your god wants, my statement to your god is more along the lines of "leave me alone, neither of us owes the other a damn thing, and i refuse to be subjected to any of your whims." and that's after granting an existence which hasn't even been earned. i don't mind that my life has difficulty, because the world as it is now, looks exactly like i'd expect a world *without* god(s) to look. assuming your god exists, i don't want anything to do with him or his machinations, be they jesus, lucifer, or anything else.

 

Choice is choice.  There will be a time again on Earth where there will be no problems for a thousand years (the millennial kingdom as described in Revelation).  However, there will be people even then who will not choose God.  That said, I don't blame you if that is your choice while living in an imperfect world.

 

However, you cannot detach yourself fully from God.  Every single breath you take is one that He's given.  I said this before, but bad things come from God allowing them to happen to us.  Every other good thing is God-given.  You're alive?  Thank God!

 

 

the story of exodus was god hardening the pharaohs heart, and needlessly killing off hundreds, if not thousands of people. funny thing about that exodus was that moses initially said it was a religious observance, and until your god made him say no, the pharaoh was going to actually allow it, but for whatever reason, instead of allowing it, your god instigated, and executed, all the plagues. in other words, your god was a dick, and killed thousands more than he needed to for no defined reason.

 

This is an intriguing point that you brought up.  Apparently, the original writing description wasn't hardening in the way you are describing it.  It was more along the lines of "fortifying".  Basically, it was originally to be read something along the lines of "Pharaoh was going to let them go.  He changed his mind.  God strengthened his resolve in his new opinion."  The Bible also shows God doing the same thing for Paul during his 1st century missionary journeys.  God doesn't interfere in decisions, but He can provide the strength to follow through with whatever decision we make.

 

 

your god, is supposedly omnipotent, in fact, on the way to said promised land, he literally killed off thousands of the hebrew people supernaturally, so i don't buy the fertile land stint. he could have made their land anywhere he wanted, and even short of that could have easily relocated the Canaanites to another land with zero effort and zero bodies. this is what i'm getting at, nothing that your god does, implies all-powerful, all knowing, or all loving. in fact, he doesn't even need to be all loving, he just needs to have a moral compass that's not darker than jeffrey dahmer. i have criteria for worship, and nothing i've read of your god, leads me to believe that he is, by any means, worth worshiping. if he existed, i would never want to cross paths with him. your god's actions, and inaction's, speak volumes about his character, and little, if any of said character, is within range of worship.

 

God let a generation pass between the people who were led out of Egypt and those that entered the promised land due to the fact that the people did not believe in Him (crazy, huh?  They live through the plagues, they crossed a divinely dried river, lived in the desert for years off of bread and meat from the sky, watched water come out of a stone and yet could not believe that the God that could do that could rout their enemies).  Certain supernatural destruction events (such as a fissure appearing and swallowing a load of people), was actually for the ultimate preservation of His people as a group.  If let run loose, they were liable to divide the people and they would never have entered the promised land.

 

As for the relocation of the Canaanites, he could have, but it appeared that it was their time to be judged.  They had 400 years while the Israelites were in Egypt to become moral, but they did not.  They literally burned babies to death among other things.  God did not want their immoral ways to corrupt His people.

 

 

[spoiler=Final thoughts to all]Ultimately, it is your choice.  Believe, don't believe.  If you don't want to be in God's presence for eternity, that is your choice.  You won't be.  However, with all the love I can send through these words, I strongly urge a reconsideration.

 

It took way too long to write this response.  I'll be willing to answer direct questions or single comments, but I can't spend this long on another response...

[VCR_CAT]

And I don't need to know definitively what the greater good of humanity is to know that an omnipotent being that truly wanted to be benevolent would have willed into existence a method of achieving whatever goal it had for us without suffering. "God works in mysterious ways" is not an argument against this, if anything it's an argument for it. Perhaps your God does work in mysterious ways; all the more reason I don't feel He deserves my worship. If He is unwilling to be open with His methods or rules for intervening, consistently and presently, I do not find any benevolence in His work and would much rather continue to believe He is a mere force without thought, which cannot comprehend the ways in which it influences the world. Because the alternative is He is vain and cruel, and I truly don't want that to be true.

 

If you don't know what the definitively greater good for humanity is, then how do you know his course of action wasn't the best way?

 

You're fine to believe what you wish to believe, but the only alternative isn't automatically vanity and cruelity; digging into what goes on, and really learning what God's character is and what goes on helps bring into a better perspective means.

 

Again, you're free to belive that which you wish to believe, but do not be so quick to assume that what definition you've set for God is the objective one.

 

 

 

that's not the response your god has though. your god kills off those who don't follow him in many a verse, or torments them, eternally. what exactly makes that a proper address? eternal punishment for finite actions, is never an equal scale. how about you let people live their lives, and just leave them alone after death? that would be like me being sent to canada, and getting shot for jaywalking, except i'd get shot forever. your god has zero right to either judge or punish my actions. nor have i done even one thing deserving of eternal punishment. (i've done quite a few things that i think should earn me a good punch in the face, but nothing beyond).

 

Is it not? The entire story of the gospel is redemption for all of humanity through all time. Now, if we want to talk legalism, the idea that your eternal destiny is judged simply by acts alone, we get into a messy area. Now, when Jesus started to really preach, it's difficult to understand how anti-disestablishment  and counter-cultural Jesus was at the time because a simple read-through doesn't get to the crux of their culture or beliefs at the time. Jesus started preaching at a time and was constantly against the Pharisees, teachers of the law. The Pharisees were the religious leaders for the Jews in Israel at the time, and their primary emphasis was on keeping to the law, keeping to ritual and spiritual cleanliness. Yet who was it that Jesus spoke out against frequently? He spent his time hanging out with the lows of society, and the closest people to him frequently involved prostitutes, those sick with leprosy who were seen as spiritually and physically unclean to the point of being banished from town, and the tax collectors. Now, tax collector sounds like just another job, but keep in mind that at this time these people represented the much-resented roman rule, and they used their authority and position to overtax citizens frequently and pocket the extra. Essentially, they were ancient extortionists and seen to have sold out to the hated regime. Yet that's who Matthew was.

 

The idea behind the gospel is forgiveness and redemption of man's sins; that a person's deeds does not matter so much as what's in their heart does. You can find this in Ephesians: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians+2&version=ESVhttps://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians+2&version=ESV and like, literally all over the Bible. God is not simply just a robot where your life's deeds are inputted into and then judgment is spat out, and I believe there is much more to it than just that. If it was just a matter of acts and deeds, we would all be deserving of the same fate, as the Bible frequently stated.

 

 

 

i never said easy way, i could not care less about what your god wants, my statement to your god is more along the lines of "leave me alone, neither of us owes the other a damn thing, and i refuse to be subjected to any of your whims." and that's after granting an existence which hasn't even been earned. i don't mind that my life has difficulty, because the world as it is now, looks exactly like i'd expect a world *without* god(s) to look. assuming your god exists, i don't want anything to do with him or his machinations, be they jesus, lucifer, or anything else.

 

This is your belief, and I'm not asking you to change it. If that's what you choose then that's what you choose.

 

 

 

the story of exodus was god hardening the pharaohs heart, and needlessly killing off hundreds, if not thousands of people. funny thing about that exodus was that moses initially said it was a religious observance, and until your god made him say no, the pharaoh was going to actually allow it, but for whatever reason, instead of allowing it, your god instigated, and executed, all the plagues. in other words, your god was a dick, and killed thousands more than he needed to for no defined reason.

 

Well, me bringing up Exodus was giving a painfully brief overview of ancient Hebrew history, but we can get into this as well. But, we can talk about this as well.

 

And yes, God intentionally hardened Pharaoh's heart. There's a lot to the plagues, actually, that means more than just a simple punishment until the leader says yes. With each plague is a link to a different Egyptian deity; the plague of darkness opposed to Ra, the plague of livestock opposing the deity of Hathor as two examples, and the plague of the firstborn finally being an affront directly against the Pharaoh himself. The point of the plagues wasn't just a physical punishment against Egypt, but also a display that showed God metaphorically defeating Egypt's deities and declaring dominance. This wasn't just for punishment, but it was a display as well.

 

As was the case with many Old Testament stories, lives were lost in what went on. I should also iterate, this not really the place to really unload a full study of Exodus and the where's and why's and how's. Regarding Pharaoh's hardening, this is what one of my textbooks has to say about it:

 

"4:21 The Bible says God hardened Pharaoh's heart, Pharaoh hardened his own heart, and Pharaoh's heart was hardened: three different verbs with no real difference of meaning. For the Hebrew writer, the fact that God is the first cause of everything does not conflict with human responsibility."

 

Which is to say that Pharaoh still had a hand in what was going on. But again, this isn't enough sufficient space or time to really dive into the book of Exodus. If you'd like over PM or something I can really get into a more in-depth study, but if you're not interested that's fine.

 

 

 

your god, is supposedly omnipotent, in fact, on the way to said promised land, he literally killed off thousands of the hebrew people supernaturally, so i don't buy the fertile land stint. he could have made their land anywhere he wanted, and even short of that could have easily relocated the Canaanites to another land with zero effort and zero bodies. this is what i'm getting at, nothing that your god does, implies all-powerful, all knowing, or all loving. in fact, he doesn't even need to be all loving, he just needs to have a moral compass that's not darker than jeffrey dahmer. i have criteria for worship, and nothing i've read of your god, leads me to believe that he is, by any means, worth worshiping. if he existed, i would never want to cross paths with him. your god's actions, and inaction's, speak volumes about his character, and little, if any of said character, is within range of worship.

 

If you mean specifically the incident with the Golden Calf, no he didn't. They were struck with "a plague" as punishment, but there's nothing to say what it was or how many people died of it, if any. If you mean while they were wondering the desert, there is no mention of supernatural deaths. They are made to wander the desert for around a generation, during which that time they are provided with manna and quail. 

 

As I've said, the stories of the Bible and the overarching story of the Bible is one of redemption and reconciliation. I can say with confidence that his good character is spoken of in the bible and especially if you dig into the Gospels and, in particular, the lessons that Jesus taught. If what it is you're looking for is information on the character of God, Jesus is the first person to look to; who he was with and how he was with them. I actually could go on about the parable of the lost sheep, lost coin, and lost son because it paints a very good picture as to what the Kingdom of Heaven is and what Jesus was speaking about when he was teaching in front of the Jewish population and the Pharisees. I could go on about that, if you're interested.

 

As for the rest, I'm not asking you to change what you believe, but rather to show that there's more to it than someone may think. If you're still not interested, then that's alright, it's your choice to make. If you have any more questions, I can answer them to the best of my ability, although I do not say that I am any sort of expert on the subject, and as well understand that these topics are very big, and there's so much that goes into each of them that I can't get into any of them sufficiently in just a few posts here. I took a semester's long course on the Book of Job, there's no way I'm going to be able to condense that down into a single post.

[vla1ne]

I'll try to break it down, point by point.

 

 

God kills off those that don't follow Him in quite a number of verses.  Yes, as harsh as that may seem, it is true.  "Sin" is not doing as God has prescribed and the consequence of sin is death.  What God knows that we do not is the result of keeping those people alive.  In God's character, if the person would have later turned to Him, would they have died?  Probably not.

 

Does God eternally torment?  No.  It doesn't say that He is doing the tormenting.  Have you considered that what we call "hell" is simply the complete absence of God's presence?  Though I admit, I do not know, it is possible that the eternal torture is simply the result of being out of God's presence, not any action dictated by God himself.

 

In terms of "right", it is simply creator's right.  If you drew a picture, do you have the right to toss it in a fire when you're done?

 

 

this is still not acceptable. by any means. killing thousands? simply because they might not like him? what can they do? he is apparently a god, any he decides to protect, should be damn near immortal if he really wants to protect them. omnipotence vs mortal beings with rocks. this is in the old book, when he's apparently everywhere, talking and walking with everybody. literally nothing, should be impossible for him.

 

lake of fire, eternal gnashing of teeth, neither of those sounds like a nice place to be, and even were they, i want nothing to do with heaven, or hell. if i have a sould, leave it alone, and let it do as it wills. 

 

no, that doesn't fly, your god has nothing to do with me. it is neither my creator, nor my benefactor. in fact, your example, means it's even less worthy of any form of respect or worship by humans. that's like saying cows should worship humans. humans don't have cows best interests at heart, and your god has none of humanities best interests at heart, neither should worship either target, you don't kill those you seek a relationship with.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Choice is choice.  There will be a time again on Earth where there will be no problems for a thousand years (the millennial kingdom as described in Revelation).  However, there will be people even then who will not choose God.  That said, I don't blame you if that is your choice while living in an imperfect world.

 

However, you cannot detach yourself fully from God.  Every single breath you take is one that He's given.  I said this before, but bad things come from God allowing them to happen to us.  Every other good thing is God-given.  You're alive?  Thank God!

 

a thousand? is your god incapable of more than a thousand? your kingdom is rather small, considering the billions of years the universe has existed.

 

no, your god, gives nothing, it merely wants credit for everything in existence. and apparently throws a tantrum when it doesn't get what it wants, commanding the deaths, violence, abduction, and rape, of and towards those who spoke against him, or accepted other games. if a serial killer held you hostage, and was only allowing you to live, because he hadn't decided to kill you, would you praise them? same concept, but multiplied by a theoretical infinity.

 

 

 

 

 

This is an intriguing point that you brought up.  Apparently, the original writing description wasn't hardening in the way you are describing it.  It was more along the lines of "fortifying".  Basically, it was originally to be read something along the lines of "Pharaoh was going to let them go.  He changed his mind.  God strengthened his resolve in his new opinion."  The Bible also shows God doing the same thing for Paul during his 1st century missionary journeys.  God doesn't interfere in decisions, but He can provide the strength to follow through with whatever decision we make.

 

changes literally nothing, in fact, it makes it worse. you can fortify the negative, but you refuse to fortify the positive? still makes your god a dick, and overeager to punish. pharaoh was said to have been about to let them go, and god didn't fortify that, instead, he fortified the refusal. see what makes this wrong? he could have stayed out of it, if his only action was to make things worse. instead of resolving the pharaoh in his first decision, he resolves him in the second. effectively killing thousands, instead of amplifying the positive, he magnifies the negative. under either lens, the story, remains abhorrent.

 

 

 

 

 

God let a generation pass between the people who were led out of Egypt and those that entered the promised land due to the fact that the people did not believe in Him (crazy, huh?  They live through the plagues, they crossed a divinely dried river, lived in the desert for years off of bread and meat from the sky, watched water come out of a stone and yet could not believe that the God that could do that could rout their enemies).  Certain supernatural destruction events (such as a fissure appearing and swallowing a load of people), was actually for the ultimate preservation of His people as a group.  If let run loose, they were liable to divide the people and they would never have entered the promised land.

 

As for the relocation of the Canaanites, he could have, but it appeared that it was their time to be judged.  They had 400 years while the Israelites were in Egypt to become moral, but they did not.  They literally burned babies to death among other things.  God did not want their immoral ways to corrupt His people.

 

 

funny how? funny because instead of discussing the matter with the people, he kills them for what amounted to a minor complaint? instead of sending them off to another land, he kills them off? not very compassionate, and again incredibly vain. your god, fails on all levels, especially the applications of his power, if you have enough power to kill the people, why not instead demonstrate it in a less lethal manner? it's by no means a stretch to say that were he as powerful as he claimed, said fissure could have been used on the enemies instead, to even greater effect, and would have had the same result.

 

your god drowned babies too, far more babies than the canaanites and of literally all species, and nobody calls him out on it. omnicide trumps babycide on any and all levels (in fact, he killed all the firstborn of egypt with his last plague, meaning he clearly gives no shits about babies himself). he cannot condemn them for committing the same actions that he himself committed on a far greater scale. he has no moral ground to stand on, whether ou believe he's the creator or not, his actions are no different than those of his creations, even though he has far more options at his disposal to handle his own issues, giving him no room to judge them at all.

 

 

 

 

[spoiler=Final thoughts to all]Ultimately, it is your choice.  Believe, don't believe.  If you don't want to be in God's presence for eternity, that is your choice.  You won't be.  However, with all the love I can send through these words, I strongly urge a reconsideration.

 

 

It took way too long to write this response.  I'll be willing to answer direct questions or single comments, but I can't spend this long on another response...

 

 

i have no intention of reconsidering. your god is amoral, by any and all human standards. he has condoned and commanded all the crimes that he has claimed to punish each on a greater scale than those he condemns, by all standards, your god is the same as those he hates, the only difference in the book being that he has superpowers, while his opponents do not.

 

okay, looks like that didn't turn out the way i'd have liked, but cutting up quotes is a chore i can do without, so i'll just reply normally. 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

there is no redemption. the thing you call sin, is literally the fault of your own god. humans knew nothing of good and evil, nor could they. it was only after the apple that they could, and as such, you cannot blame them. it is illogical as all hell to claim that humans should shoulder the burden of your gods mistake. it's sins of the father, multiplied by infinity, and thrown full force at the son, and all decendants, while the father gets off scott free.

 

the idea behind the bible does not matter, because the idea, and all parts following are flawed at their very foundations, on at least a hundred different points.

 

 

 

indeed, it is my belief, and you would have me believe that i deserve to burn eternally for it. even without you saying as much, that is your gods stated punishment for said belief. (lake of fire, and all that, alongside jesus claiming none shall enter heaven but through him, which has, until this day, been defined as believe in jesus or go to hell forever.) your malleability on the topi does not match that of your god, who is clear as day on it.

 

 

 

be it display or punishment, it was not required, and again, it does not change my point, at all. it simply cements your god being a dick for no other reaosn than he can. he could just as easily have left well enough alone if he were so inclined to respect the free will that he never wanted humans to have in the first place. he had a hand in hardening the heart of the pharaoh, and as such, had a hand in killing thousands, in what amounted to a holy pissing contest. humans are not what matters to your god, else he would not have killed as many as he did, the worship is what e was after, and it's shown repeatedly, throughout the book, that that was his goal all along.

 

 

 

 

did you conveniently forget the fire killing hundreds of people for burning the wrong incense? or the fire killing the 250 people who burned the right incense? or after that, burning the people who had any complaints (instead of explaining patiently like a good leader)? the plague was pretty much a death sentence, as agreed on by most who read the bible, and under the context, he's already killed hundreds, and kills even more even after the plague, what exactly tells you the plague was nonfatal, when literally everything else surrounding said plague, was a death sentence?

 

 

again, redemption for what? humans original suffering was not from humans, but god, and much of what humans did, god did first, or on a greater scale. what is there to redeem, it's pot ruling kettle, because pot has a superiority complex.

 

 

i already know about the bible. i was a christian, i read the bible because i wanted to make sure i knew what i was supporting, and i left christianity after studying, because the bible was not a story about a god that i would worship, but a story about a being that was as vain as the people i hated most, who killed on a whim, barely took the time to actually reason, and treated humans as if they were playthings to siphon worship from.

 

 

[a bad post]

two things, first, your first claim is directly contradicted by jesus, who states, (and has been supported in his claim by pastors and preachers for decades) that none shall enter heaven without believing in him (he is himself god, so the claim is akin to stating that heaven's locked off to nonbelievers)  the original idea of humanity was not ruined by you, or i, or any of humanity to follow adam and eve, in fact, even adam and eve, were not at fault, your god allowed all the parameters for said fall in the book, omniscience would mean that was the intent from the start, and without omniscience, it implies a devastating lack of both forethought, and power. because even past said event, your god could not fix the flaw, which honestly was less of a flaw, and more of an awakening for humanity. if a parent leaves a knife within the reach of a child, is the child to blame for touching the knife? no, it is the parents fault, and that same rule applies to god and eve. eve knew nothing at the time of eating the apple, neither good nor sin, she is guiltless in any sense, whereas your god knew, even if he were not omniscient, how eating said apple would end, and clearly knew that he would be incapable of fixing the result should his children harm themselves with the shiny knife apple. in other words, by the words of your book this is our punishment for god's mistake.

 

as for your god and his punishment, i don't want to be in heaven, nor do i want to be in hell, i simply want him to leave me alone. forever,(own universe optional) even after i die, i want nothing to do with your god. can he not do something as simple as that?

 

 

is that not free will? free will, is letting humans do as they will, it does not go both ways, if you want to give somebody free will, you do not then, in the next breath, attempt to punish them for exercising said will. it is up to humans, to judge humans, not a god. and beyond even that, what you have just said, is basically that god didn't want humans to have free will, (it was forbidden to humans) lastly, vanity is a fatal flaw when it comes to dieties that i'm looking to worship. if you're a vain being, then i will never, in any capacity, worship you, because it means you don't actually care about me, but about how i can make you look good.

I want to preface this by saying that I do not believe in God either and that this isn't my own argument, so I don't fully understand, nor do I particularly care to because I think it's pretentious and contrived. The justification I have heard, however, to the first point is that because God is the source of all good things, so people physically cannot do good things without believing in Him. So, when a person who "claims" not to believe in God does good it means that some part of their subconscious actually does believe in God. That being said I basically agree with everything you have to say here. God, especially Old Testament God, has never seemed particularly benevolent or forgiving to me. Jesus seems simply puzzling to me, because the idea is that Jesus is meant to come to die so that humans may be absolved of their sins, however by killing humans have again permanently stained themselves in sin, so what was the point in the first place?

[Sunshine Jesse]

The fact that Jesus' sacrifice was apparently still rneaningful despite the fact that he came back is also puzzling to me.

 

This is actually a good thread though, few arguments are being made that I myself wouldn't use and the religious side isn't using the stupid ones like Pascal's Wager and the cosmological argument.

 

It's a nice change from the early days of YouTube atheism.

[bury the year]

God, especially Old Testament God, has never seemed particularly benevolent or forgiving to me. Jesus seems simply puzzling to me, because the idea is that Jesus is meant to come to die so that humans may be absolved of their sins, however by killing humans have again permanently stained themselves in sin, so what was the point in the first place?

 

I do want to bring this up real quickly, because people seem to forget a certain point about Jesus' death.

 

8 For he finds fault with them when he says: "Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 9 not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord. 10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 11 And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. 12 For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more." 13 In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

 

 

Hebrews 8:8-13. God is basically saying "the old rules no longer apply, as I've forged a new promise with my people." There's a reason why people distinguish the God of the Old Testament from the one in the New Testament: He is no longer acting the way that He did in the Old Testament, as the old Israelites didn't follow his covenant but the new ones are. (That's sort of why Jesus came down to Earth, after all.)

 

If you're making a philosophical critique of God in modern times, I think it's appropriate to look at the New Testament for what the "modern teachings" are supposed to be, and the Old Testament as history behind it. At least that's the interpretation I grew up with.

[Aerion Brightflame]

An omnipotent being that is also benevolent would not need to create plagues to facilitate positive change; it could just will it so. So, it is not omnibenevolent and still not deserving of worship.

 

Unless it is also his will that we must suffer to truly improve?

 

Omnibenelevolent means all loving, or all good. But nowhere does it say either of those two things cannot existing sumtaneously with a need to allow for suffering. A parent should effectively be all loving of there children, but they will still punish the child when needs must, or act in ways the child cannot understand because the parent knows it is best for them.

 

And if we operate under the idea that absolute good does not exist, we can assume instead that God being all good means he infact always acts upon the best of intentions instead of always doing what seems 'absolute good'

 

It's again like the example a child; It's often within the parents power to avlieviate the chlds suffering, but it's only through that suffering that the child can really become an independant person.A child who has everything handed to them from youth will probably become a bit of a brat.  It is possible that whilst God is all-powerful, and all loving, he chooses to allow us to suffer because it is the only way we can tryly grow as individuals under the ideas of free will he desires.

 

I'ma little annoyed at myself that it's just variations of 'God works in mysterious ways', but it's a decent point to consider I feel. Because God should have a vastly gtreater scope that us; His actions should be more oft than not hard to quantify.