• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

the Crimes of God

Kelly of the Phoenix

Well-Known Member
Man is the dominant species
That's only because we don't count cockroaches :)

Was He a highly effective military strategist? Yes.
Unless the opponents have iron weapons. Apparently God lives by fairy rules and is allergic to iron or something.

Is it fair to judge the standards of 3,500 years ago with todays standard?
Yes, because I was under the impression many consider morality to be objective. Age doesn't make evil less evil.

Yes it does, it is said that God's word never changes, it seems he had some sort of brain transplant when the NT was introduced.
To be fair, OT God repents of drowning practically everyone. NT God never apologizes for killing off nearly everyone in the apocalypse.

Death for collecting wood! That's a severe penalty would you agree?
Killing a couple because they wanted to keep some money in their wallet instead of giving it to Ol' Pete is more enlightened? Oh, I'm sorry, Pete didn't kill them ... it was *cough*THE WRATH OF GOD *cough*...

Of course we all know the story of the woman who committed adultery
He never says stoning is bad. He was criticizing their hypocrisy in sleeping with the town bicycle and then only punishing her and not themselves.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
These two points should be singled out. Of course not many Christians think that way because we consider it today to be unethical, immoral, and illegal to sell anyone into slavery, let alone your very own children.

This is true. Christianity was 2,000 years ago during a time of emperors, slavery, male domination, and poor levels of education. The Christian Covenant now has the same relevance as the Mosaic covenant 2,000 years ago.

I am a Baha'i whose Faith is based on Baha'u'llah who came with New teachings from God in the 19th century. Those teachings emphasise the Oneness of humanity, the equality of men and women, abolition of slavery, harmony between science and religion, universal love, resolving conflict peacefully through consultation, democratic institutions for the governance of human affairs, and the need for sound international governance.

I also believe in One God who has inspired the Major world religions. I appreciate the role that Judaism and Christianity have played in the development of civilisation but we are clearly in a new era of human history and the teachings of these ancient religions will no longer meet humanities needs now.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Crimes of God?
What waffle! :D

Well, my God here on Earth is definitely Mother-Nature, and despite her terrifying fury She offers us life in the form of ticking-time, second by second.
Nothing that happens here or out in the Universe can be a crime of God, not even destriuction such as Super Novae.

But Humans?........ Humans are the only creatures here that can be described as 'evil', and even then the very young, very simple, very ill cannot be included....
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
T................................................ ....................................................... I appreciate the role that Judaism and Christianity have played in the development of civilisation but we are clearly in a new era of human history and the teachings of these ancient religions will no longer meet humanities needs now.

But what about The North American, Central American, South American, Hindu, Zen, Buddhist and many other Religions?

And we of the Studd-Hill-Full-Moon-Frolickers definitely feel that we've been seriously omitted as well!
 

omega2xx

Well-Known Member
I wouldn't kill children for name-calling (2Kings 2:23-24).

Dollar to a doughnut hole you app;rove of abortion on demand. If you don' know God's motive, and you don't, you can't judge what He did as evil.


Gen 6:6 "And the LORD was sorry that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart."
Psa 78:40 "How often they rebelled against him in the wilderness and grieved him in the desert!"
Psa 78:59 "he was wroth, and greatly abhorred Israel"
Isa 7:13 "you weary my God also"
Isa 63:10 "they rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit"
Mk 3:5 "he looked around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart"
Eph 4:30 "grieve the Holy Spirit of God"
Heb 3:17 "with whom was he grieved forty years"

Seems to me that the verses do say that "he often finds himself vexed, grieved, wearied, or loathing things".

That is because you want them to say that. If you understand the Bile, they do not even imply such a thing.


To follow an emotionally unstable, warmongering, bloodthirsty, changable god is a greater height of illogic, IMO.

Your statement is right but you evaluation is wrong. To follow someone who is not a God, seems rather sad to me.
 

omega2xx

Well-Known Member
*the quote thingy wouldn't work right so I paraphrased*
The Bible makes it clear that he was angry with "wickedness" and "evilness," but that he especially does not like disobedience or people worshiping other gods. He punished the Egyptians for holding the Jews as slaves, but only a truly monstrous, cold blooded and heartless ******* would even have children killed. If a world leader did that today, such as ordering the deaths of the first born or the butchering of entire villages down to the children, we would not tolerate it and we certainly would not regard this person as good, holy, or righteous.
It's time we start applying equal standards to god.


What was God's motive? You can't judge without knowing that.
 

Blackdog22

Well-Known Member
and if you could see a trend emerging that would be harmful
a trend that would undermine the better nature of Man.....what do you do about it?

let it fester?

I suppose if the idea was to control the outcome then you wouldn't make such a big deal about free will.. There has been a trend forming for quite some time that has resulted in the deaths of billions of kids deaths, usually before the age of 5. Free will seems really convenient to write that off, but when it comes to the Old Testament, I suppose he just couldn't let it slide. Some being he must be. the excuse king of the world it would appear. Lets make Churches in his name why dont we and pray to him on Sundays :D
 
Last edited:

Blackdog22

Well-Known Member
What was God's motive? You can't judge without knowing that.

His motive was that the Egyptians set the Jews free. Have you not read the story Omega? Its quite popular and no, its not a good reason to murder children. Repaying evil with evil is one of the worst moral practices in the Bible and God seems to take great pleasure in such activity.
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
Probably I can't understand you is because you're stuttering.

If someone blames god, how are they in denial (40)?

Some people honestly do believe in god and are hurt by him. Others don't know what you mean when you tell them they are in denial over a god that doesn't exist.

If god doesn't exist, and you say they are pointing their finger up and blaming god, who are they pointing a finger towards?

Since you can't imagine yourself pointing a finger at god (even though it's a hypothetical question), if you made up a character in your head (not god) and pointed your finger at it in anger because she somehow hurt your fingers, I would ask you the same question, who are you pointing the finger at?

If a child was blaming an imaginary friend (a real imaginary friend, not god) for messing with his sand castle, and you the parent hear this, would you not ask "who are you blaming Johny?" Maybe a child can give an logical answer because children don't over analogize a hypothetical question. Maybe the parent can get a gist of why the child is actually angry and who that child is angry at by addressing his imaginary friend as a real person.

Turn it back to god...

If you cannot answer the question of who you are pointing the finger at (even the answer "no one would be cool as long as it's honest") then how would you expect my to understand why you think people deny god by pointing a finger at him when you don't even know based on the analogy who they are pointing the finger at to begin with?

If you have read all of this actively, thank you.
the confusion isn't mine
I do believe there is a God
and I see people pointing fingers at Him

I don't blame God
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
the confusion isn't mine
I do believe there is a God
and I see people pointing fingers at Him

I don't blame God

You're missing the point.

I know you are not blaming god.

I know you see people are pointing fingers at god.

I understand that.

My question refers to your original comment about someone else blaming god. Since you can't hypothesize that god doesn't exist so I can understand your comment, I made up a scenario instead.

If you are blaming a creature on an non-existent planet Pluto, and I ask you who are you pointing at, what would you say?

If you say creature, and I know Pluto doesn't exist (which it doesn't), then I would be confused, odviously. So, I'd ask you to clarify this creature and the planet he is standing on

--so I know why you are blaming it.

Not you it's an analogy for an made up person who is blaming a creature on a invisible Pluto and my getting clarification on why you are blaming an actual creature that one, does not exist and two, the planet does not exist as well?

Do you get the analogy? Blaming something that doesn't exist? How does it make sense to blame something that does not exist?

Something not someone, not god, not an entity. Just something.
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
You're missing the point.

I know you are not blaming god.

I know you see people are pointing fingers at god.

I understand that.

My question refers to your original comment about someone else blaming god. Since you can't hypothesize that god doesn't exist so I can understand your comment, I made up a scenario instead.

If you are blaming a creature on an non-existent planet Pluto, and I ask you who are you pointing at, what would you say?

If you say creature, and I know Pluto doesn't exist (which it doesn't), then I would be confused, odviously. So, I'd ask you to clarify this creature and the planet he is standing on

--so I know why you are blaming it.

Not you it's an analogy for an made up person who is blaming a creature on a invisible Pluto and my getting clarification on why you are blaming an actual creature that one, does not exist and two, the planet does not exist as well?

Do you get the analogy? Blaming something that doesn't exist? How does it make sense to blame something that does not exist?

Something not someone, not god, not an entity. Just something.
like blaming superstitious luck?

I don't believe in luck...though I often use the word
many people blame their luck
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
like blaming superstitious luck? I don't believe in luck...though I often use the word many people blame their luck

Blaming superstitious luck? No.

Okay.... Um another example. If someone else blamed Captain Kirk for their problems, and Captain Kirk doesn't exist as an actual person, who is this someone else blaming?

(By the way, Captain Kirk still exists)

images

At 85 years old!
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
apparently I just don't get your question

blaming something that doesn't exist is dysfunctional
no effect

blaming God?.....i think is risky
the effect is pending the hour of the last breath
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
apparently I just don't get your question

blaming something that doesn't exist is dysfunctional
no effect

blaming God?.....i think is risky
the effect is pending the hour of the last breath

Good. You got the question. I just noticed you cant do a hypothetical with god.

Since many of us do not believe in god, it is as if you are saying we are blaming captin kirk for our problems or are in denial that captian kirk doesnt exist.

You are right, it is a dysfunctional effect. To me, its rediculous. Do you see were we are coming from now?
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
Good. You got the question. I just noticed you cant do a hypothetical with god.

Since many of us do not believe in god, it is as if you are saying we are blaming captin kirk for our problems or are in denial that captian kirk doesnt exist.

You are right, it is a dysfunctional effect. To me, its rediculous. Do you see were we are coming from now?
just to be sure....

do you believe in God?
 

buddhist

Well-Known Member
Dollar to a doughnut hole you app;rove of abortion on demand. If you don' know God's motive, and you don't, you can't judge what He did as evil.
If I can't judge your god as evil, then neither can you judge him as good.

That is because you want them to say that. If you understand the Bile, they do not even imply such a thing.
Are you suggesting that your god does not get vexed, grieved, wearied, angry, etc., even when those words are directly in those verses?

Your statement is right but you evaluation is wrong. To follow someone who is not a God, seems rather sad to me.
To follow such a god, seems rather sad to me.
 
Top