Why worship the biblical god?

[Harrytic]

Perhaps I didn't explain my viewpoint clearly enough. I do not believe in this god. Even if I did, I would not worship him. My question was "why worship the biblical god?". Obviously to worship him, you would have to believe in him, so I was speaking in a hypothetical sense, assuming he was real and the bible was true. I must have stepped out of the hypothetical view for a few posts without first explaining my own beliefs, I apologize for the confusion.

Yes, you did step out of that hypothetical view a few posts back. I am aware that when you started this thread you were looking at it hypothetically. Good on you.

So how long was God sitting around in heaven until he got bored enough to create the universe?

I have no idea.

and he couldn't have found entertainment in a way that doesn't cause suffering on earth and eternally in hell?

I don't know. God seems to have a bit of a sadistic streak to him. I think you've seen that for yourself when you've looked back at the Old Testament. The fact that he created an eternal hell should confirm that even more I would think. God is who God is.

Of all the arguments I've heard for why God would do the things the bible says he did, "he was bored" is one of the most odd and amusing. The bible says nothing about god being bored, as far as I know, so you must have came up with this yourself. You seem smart enough to come up with a better idea than this, you must not have thought it through very long.

God being bored is an amusing notion? Perhaps so, but like I indicated in my last post, I think, an intelligent being needs a lot more to keep his mind occupied than a being with little or no intelligence.

Yes, this is conjecture on my part, after studying the bible. I like to philosophise about things like this. It seems logical to me that such a being as God would want something to do. He would want something to rule over.

I'm actually a writer. I get to play God with my characters and it entertains me for hours. Sometimes I have bad things happen to my characters. It makes writing that story that much more interesting. It would not be so interesting if all the characters were nice to each other and only ever did pleasant things to each other. It would also be very boring if there were no villains to add conflict and troubles for the heroes. I don't think it's a stretch that it would be the same for God.

 

[Matthew78]

The OT MUST be read through the lens of the NT. You're going the other way around.

Why not read the Hebrew Bible in its historical and literally context? Why must anyone read it through the bias of any New Testament writer?

But I suppose you're just ignoring the entirety of the NT, anyway. You're ignoring God being compassionate and merciful, long-suffering and of great goodness.

Oh? Children die of cancer, women are raped and murdered, and human trafficking continues to happen. Innocent people are murdered in acts of terrorism and evil tyrants have committed acts of genocide. No one is ignoring the entirety of the New Testament. Some of us have actually read it and some of us who have read it find these claims of a "compassionate" and "merciful" deity of yours to ring hallow.

You're ignoring God being love. You're ignoring God being the One Who wishes to redeem us to sin and death.

It doesn't seem like Introvert is ignoring the gospel message; s/he seems to find it unbelievable. I don't blame him/her. I don't see what is so loving or just about allowing children to be sold into sexual slavery or allowing any children to starve to death before their 1st birthday. God is a being of love? Well God can stop all of this with a snap of the divine finger. He doesn't. This strikes me as being horribly negligent. If I walked down a street and saw a man mugging a woman with the intent of beating her and violating her and I just shrugged my shoulders and walked on, what kind of person would I be? Suppose that she even saw me and cried out for help and I just said to her, "Sorry sweetheart, you're on your own. I guess it just sucks to be you!" and went about my business? I would be guilty of negligence, right? If not, why not? If I would be, why not God?

You're ignoring the fact that God so LOVED the world, that He gave His Only-Begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have life everlasting. You're ignoring that God became one of us and is with us. And so much more...

If God so loved the world that Jesus came to redeem us then why doesn't God tell us himself, to our faces? Why doesn't Jesus appear to Introvert and me and tell us to our faces?

Matthew

 

[Shiranui117]

I disagree. The OT paints a picture of God and what he is. God later decided to change his methods - thus the NT. But still we see a God who expects complete and utter obedience or else. You can't just ignore the way God is in the OT. That's being dishonest about who God is.

Yet the reason for everything God does in the OT is explained in the NT.

God can be loving and merciful when he wants to be, no doubts about that. But you can't just look at the good and ignore God's bad points. That's being intellectually dishonest and sceptics will not take you seriously.

Sure, it's great that God has done this. It sets him apart from all the other Gods, but still... God requires a blood sacrifice. The act of sacrifice and the smell of the slaughtered animal pleases him. He brought in Jesus to provide an easier way for us to avoid his wrath without having to continually spill the blood of an innocent animal. Blood however has no supernatural power over God and in the long run it’s up to him whether he forgives or not.

Were you not paying attention when I said that penal substitution was an invented false doctrine that was made up over a THOUSAND YEARS after the start of Christianity? Where were you when I explained what the first Christians believed about Jesus' death?

And if we do not accept his sacrifice then he will have us cast into hell.

Only those who reject God and set themselves against Him will end up experiencing Hell. But I'm going to take a wild guess and say that you believe that Native Americans in 300 AD are doomed to Hell because they never got a chance to accept Jesus' offer of eternal life, right?

It’s an obvious threat to anyone who does not have the mindset that God is loving, wonderful, merciful and just.

A god who makes such threats like a spoiled child is neither loving, wonderful, merciful nor just.

It shows us that God is the same God who wiped out the world with a flood,[/QUOTE]
And Who later redeemed those people from death and sin at the Harrowing of Hades.

the same God who ordered a man stoned to death for picking up sticks on the Sabbath…

A man who knew exactly what the rules of the Sabbath were and what would happen if he disobeyed them, and who had already received an explicit warning from God once about what was expected of him. Yet that man STILL flagrantly disobeyed God for such a small thing.

the same God who struck a man dead simply for trying to save the Ark of the Covenant from falling.

And in the process breaking numerous laws about how the Ark was supposed to be handled and transported. The entire fiasco showed a gross uncaring about God's commandments.

Clearly the NT God is exactly the same as the OT God.

I'm not sure if this is sarcastic or not.

I truly believe that even if you were burning for five minutes, totally engulfed in flames just to get a taste of what it's like, you would quickly change your mind. It's all very well to talk tough on the Internet. A totally different thing if you're put in the situation. If there's one thing we know when it comes to humans is torture... even the threat of it... is enough to cause even the toughest of individuals to submit. Integrity and bravery would go hurtling down the gurgler pretty quick.

I think anyone who claims they would still stand up to God, facing that hellacious fate, are lying to themselves.

Then we are all cowards.

 

[Shiranui117]

Why not read the Hebrew Bible in its historical and literally context? Why must anyone read it through the bias of any New Testament writer?

If you're going to be a Christian, then logically, you should have the Christian take on the OT, no?

Oh? Children die of cancer, women are raped and murdered, and human trafficking continues to happen. Innocent people are murdered in acts of terrorism and evil tyrants have committed acts of genocide. No one is ignoring the entirety of the New Testament. Some of us have actually read it and some of us who have read it find these claims of a "compassionate" and "merciful" deity of yours to ring hallow.

If you want to go on being an atheist, then go right on ahead, I can't stop you. I'd explain to you about free will and original sin and all that, but you've probably heard it before.

Harrytic, however, claims to be a Christian, and he is disregarding how God is revealed in the New Testament. So that's a different kettle of fish.

It doesn't seem like Introvert is ignoring the gospel message; s/he seems to find it unbelievable.

Oh, I'm sorry, I was talking to Harrytic, not Introvert. Sorry if you got confused.

I don't blame him/her. I don't see what is so loving or just about allowing children to be sold into sexual slavery or allowing any children to starve to death before their 1st birthday. God is a being of love? Well God can stop all of this with a snap of the divine finger. He doesn't. This strikes me as being horribly negligent. If I walked down a street and saw a man mugging a woman with the intent of beating her and violating her and I just shrugged my shoulders and walked on, what kind of person would I be? Suppose that she even saw me and cried out for help and I just said to her, "Sorry sweetheart, you're on your own. I guess it just sucks to be you!" and went about my business? I would be guilty of negligence, right? If not, why not? If I would be, why not God?

Falls into the same Problem of Evil already discussed. I know from the outset that I won't be changing your mind, and so I won't bother.

If God so loved the world that Jesus came to redeem us then why doesn't God tell us himself, to our faces? Why doesn't Jesus appear to Introvert and me and tell us to our faces?

Matthew

Fish aren't always aware of being in water.

 

[Matthew78]

If you're going to be a Christian, then logically, you should have the Christian take on the OT, no?

Okay, maybe I misunderstood you. I realize that you were replying in some posts to Harrytic so maybe this comment was directed at him. If so, I retract my statement.

If you want to go on being an atheist, then go right on ahead, I can't stop you. I'd explain to you about free will and original sin and all that, but you've probably heard it before.

Well, I used to be an atheist. I found being an atheist to be very empty and unfulfilling. Nowadays, I consider myself an agnostic who leans heavily towards deism. About free will and original sin, I suspect that you're right. I don't think you would be breaking any new ground.

Harrytic, however, claims to be a Christian, and he is disregarding how God is revealed in the New Testament. So that's a different kettle of fish.

I get that much. He's like an acquaintance of mine who is also an author. My acquaintance, Thom, is a liberal Christian. He denies the existence of Yahweh and yet he calls himself a Christian. Part of the reason is that he retains a fondness for the character and teaechings of Jesus. Then there are folks like Bishop Spong who I just do not get. I Don't get me wrong; I love the man but his theological approach to the Bible leaves me dumbfounded.

Oh, I'm sorry, I was talking to Harrytic, not Introvert. Sorry if you got confused.

That's okay. At least we seem to be understanding each other better.

Falls into the same Problem of Evil already discussed. I know from the outset that I won't be changing your mind, and so I won't bother.

Fair enough.

Fish aren't always aware of being in water.

Um...okay.

 

[ChristineES]

Yes, I know, but shouldn't it be backed by Scripture in this context? Think of all the "false gods" in the Bible.

I wasn't stating a fact, I was stating an opinion.

When they spoke of false Gods, they usually were talking about idols made of wood and stone.

 

[Shiranui117]

Okay, maybe I misunderstood you. I realize that you were replying in some posts to Harrytic so maybe this comment was directed at him. If so, I retract my statement.

Yeah, I was talking to Harrytic. It's all good, though.

Well, I used to be an atheist. I found being an atheist to be very empty and unfulfilling. Nowadays, I consider myself an agnostic who leans heavily towards deism. About free will and original sin, I suspect that you're right. I don't think you would be breaking any new ground.

I get that much. He's like an acquaintance of mine who is also an author. My acquaintance, Thom, is a liberal Christian. He denies the existence of Yahweh and yet he calls himself a Christian. Part of the reason is that he retains a fondness for the character and teaechings of Jesus.

At least we have all that settled, lol. And thanks for sharing your story.

Then there are folks like Bishop Spong who I just do not get. I Don't get me wrong; I love the man but his theological approach to the Bible leaves me dumbfounded.

Yeah... After looking up his twelve points, I really do not understand how he can call himself a Christian, or why the Episcopalians let him stay a bishop.

That's okay. At least we seem to be understanding each other better.

Yes. That always makes me happy.

 

[idea]

The Two Travelers and the Farmer

A traveler came upon an old farmer hoeing in his field beside the road. Eager to rest his feet, the wanderer hailed the countryman, who seemed happy enough to straighten his back and talk for a moment. "What sort of people live in the next town?" asked the stranger.
"What were the people like where you've come from?" replied the farmer, answering the question with another question.
"They were a bad lot. Troublemakers all, and lazy too. The most selfish people in the world, and not a one of them to be trusted. I'm happy to be leaving the scoundrels."
"Is that so?" replied the old farmer. "Well, I'm afraid that you'll find the same sort in the next town.
Disappointed, the traveler trudged on his way, and the farmer returned to his work.


Some time later another stranger, coming from the same direction, hailed the farmer, and they stopped to talk. "What sort of people live in the next town?" he asked.
"What were the people like where you've come from?" replied the farmer once again.
"They were the best people in the world. Hard working, honest, and friendly. I'm sorry to be leaving them."
"Fear not," said the farmer. "You'll find the same sort in the next town."

The moral of the story? We see what we believe.

 

[Shiranui117]

The Two Travelers and the Farmer

A traveler came upon an old farmer hoeing in his field beside the road. Eager to rest his feet, the wanderer hailed the countryman, who seemed happy enough to straighten his back and talk for a moment. "What sort of people live in the next town?" asked the stranger.
"What were the people like where you've come from?" replied the farmer, answering the question with another question.
"They were a bad lot. Troublemakers all, and lazy too. The most selfish people in the world, and not a one of them to be trusted. I'm happy to be leaving the scoundrels."
"Is that so?" replied the old farmer. "Well, I'm afraid that you'll find the same sort in the next town.
Disappointed, the traveler trudged on his way, and the farmer returned to his work.


Some time later another stranger, coming from the same direction, hailed the farmer, and they stopped to talk. "What sort of people live in the next town?" he asked.
"What were the people like where you've come from?" replied the farmer once again.
"They were the best people in the world. Hard working, honest, and friendly. I'm sorry to be leaving them."
"Fear not," said the farmer. "You'll find the same sort in the next town."

The moral of the story? We see what we believe.

Ahh, good ol' Aesop

 

[Harrytic]

Were you not paying attention when I said that penal substitution was an invented false doctrine that was made up over a THOUSAND YEARS after the start of Christianity? Where were you when I explained what the first Christians believed about Jesus' death?

[sarcasm] Oh sorry, I didn't realise that you were the final authority on all this stuff. I bow to your superior knowlege and understanding on this matter. All hail, Shiranuri![/sarcasm]

Just because you make those claims doesn't make them so and doesn't mean I should take them seriously. I do not acknowledge you as an authority. I will go by what the bible tells me, thank you.

nly those who reject God and set themselves against Him will end up experiencing Hell. But I'm going to take a wild guess and say that you believe that Native Americans in 300 AD are doomed to Hell because they never got a chance to accept Jesus' offer of eternal life, right?

No, I don't believe the Native Americans in 300AD are necessarily doomed to hell. God will have mercy on who he wants to have mercy on. Jesus's death has no supernatural power over God, it just appeases God. He gets pleasure over sacrifice. He is quite capable of forgiving without the need for the slaughter of the innocent, so therefore he can choose to have mercy on those Native Americans as he can on small children and those with mental disabilities. It's all up to him in the long run.

Knowingly rejecting God on the other hand is another thing all together. This enrages God.

A god who makes such threats like a spoiled child is neither loving, wonderful, merciful nor just.

I thought I kind of already alluded to that earlier. The bible clealry shows us that God is not always loving, wonderful , just or merciful.

It shows us that God is the same God who wiped out the world with a flood,

And Who later redeemed those people from death and sin at the Harrowing of Hades.

Really, and how do you know that?

Then we are all cowards.

Like I said before it's not cowardly to back down from a battle you don't have a hope of winning. In fact it's prudent. I'd hate to have you leading me into a war if your tactic is to go charging in to face impossible odds because of your own vanity and pride.

 

[Harrytic]

Harrytic, however, claims to be a Christian, and he is disregarding how God is revealed in the New Testament. So that's a different kettle of fish.

There are many different ways to look at the bible. Yours it not the be all and end all, as much as you might like to think so. What you are doing is putting on the rose-colored glasses. I used to wear those glasses for a number of years, but it just didn't add up to what I saw in reality. When I took those glasses off and opened my eyes, I came to the conclusions that I have come to. Does that mean I am not a Christian?

 

[thau]

The Judeo-Christian god, as described in the bible, is one of the most evil creatures I have ever read about. He comes off as a tyrannical dictator. He punishes all of humanity for the sins of Adam and Eve. He created hell, and sends billions of people there, simply for believing the wrong book. He commits countless atrocities and acts of genocide in the bible. He causes so much unnecessary suffering. He blames his creation for being the way he created them. And above all this, he demands to be loved and worshipped by the very beings that he created.

Why would anyone with an ounce of integrity worship such an evil creature?

Translation: You insist God give you and all men eternal life, that they never suffer or strive for anything, that they just be pampered with pleasures, that they never show any gratitude, that they never learn what true love (agape love) is, that they just be little babies who get everything they want, and if they don’t get it they cry.

Something tells me God does not want that kind of a creature. We all admire and love the man who in the face of fear and harm challenges himself for the sake of those dear to him and shows courage and resolve to fight the good fight. So apparently does our Lord.

One other thing: Your suggesting your brain is equal or greater in reason and knowledge than God’s brain is a very silly start to any serious discussion.

 

[Shiranui117]

There are many different ways to look at the bible. Yours it not the be all and end all, as much as you might like to think so. What you are doing is putting on the rose-colored glasses. I used to wear those glasses for a number of years, but it just didn't add up to what I saw in reality. When I took those glasses off and opened my eyes, I came to the conclusions that I have come to. Does that mean I am not a Christian?

I wear no glasses. I simply do my very best to communicate with God, discerning His will and the Faith that He established and the Truth in how He relates to the world.

Your view of God is not the be-all, end-all either. At least I don't think you're deluding yourself. So I'd appreciate it if you didn't talk to me as if I want to have a lily-livered, feel-good quasi-spirituality.

 

[ChristineES]

We are really not talking about God- but the concept of God. The Old Testament isn't really about God, but about the men and women who followed Him and their view of Him. We, as humans, are probably unable to see the true nature of God- I don't see how we could.

 

[Introvert]

Translation: You insist God give you and all men eternal life, that they never suffer or strive for anything, that they just be pampered with pleasures, that they never show any gratitude, that they never learn what true love (agape love) is, that they just be little babies who get everything they want, and if they don’t get it they cry.

Wrong. I simply question why we should worship this petty, jealous, insecure sociopath you call a god.

 

[Thunderfoot]

They're believing in God but not literally in the bible. Because believing in God is a very reasonable thing to do for many people born into a primarily Abrahamic society. And they believe the bible was written by humans and can contain errors. And the parts that make God unreasonable are obviously not to be accepted.

Which is further evidence, to me at least, that man created god in his own image - not vice versa.

Which, come to think of it, also partly explains why there's some 30,000 Christian sects.

 

[George-ananda]

Which is further evidence, to me at least, that man created god in his own image - not vice versa.

You are partially correct here. God is beyond man's ability to conceptualize so what they did 2,500 years ago was to try to conceptualize the unknown with human-like attributes. Perhaps the mystics have the best understanding but they can not transmit in words what they experience.

 

[Introvert]

So far, I believe the only answer that has been given for my original question "why worship the biblical god?" is "because he'll burn you for eternity if you don't". Unless someone else gave an answer and I missed it?

 

[thau]

Wrong. I simply question why we should worship this petty, jealous, insecure sociopath you call a god.

Because we know He created us and has promised us eternal life and joy asking for so very little in return. If that request is too much for you to accept well you have the free will to tell God 'not interested, I will take my chances on either you do not exist or this hell you are talking about.'

Your description of God being petty or insecure or a sociopath is downright juvenile, in my opinion. Yes, He does say in Scripture that He is a jealous God, but not in the way we normally understand the word jealous.

You also must surely be ignoring a thousand other ways of looking at our God and life and the evidence for life after death? I don't get it?

 

[Introvert]

Because we know He created us and has promised us eternal life and joy asking for so very little in return. If that request is too much for you to accept well you have the free will to tell God 'not interested, I will take my chances on either you do not exist or this hell you are talking about.'

You don't "know" this. You read it in a book and took it on faith.

Your description of God being petty or insecure or a sociopath is downright juvenile, in my opinion. Yes, He does say in Scripture that He is a jealous God, but not in the way we normally understand the word jealous.

I think it's an accurate description. And how is his jealousy different from the way we understand it? I see no difference.

You also must surely be ignoring a thousand other ways of looking at our God and life and the evidence for life after death? I don't get it?

This has nothing to do with evidence. I am not questioning his existence, I am questioning why you would worship him. I am taking him at face-value from the words in the bible.