God is GOOD and I will defend Him. A Challenge for Atheists

I wrote an article on this. LINK Science tries to describe the 90% of reality we do not see. Faith describes the 10% we do see. Who has more verifiable evidence? The story tells itself. Nature is its own verification that the story we learn from living is the story that is told by reality. The Bible is another verification. Science another.

What is the story trying to say to us? Hate and you get more hate. Love and you destroy hate. Pride is self-love. Humility is reverence for others.

"Hate never dispels hate. Only love dispels hate." Even Buddha got it right.

Originally posted by RealTruthSeeker

Originally posted by ExistentialNightmare

I never offered any evidence.

That's the problem with atheist, they never bring anything to the table that is believable, or can even be supported by anything. Don't you realize that it's take faith to believe the way you do?

And what is faith? Take your pick, either way, there is no way around this fact.

1. confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
2. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact. dictionary.reference.com...

So you see, your belief is really no different than mine, you believe what you believe without proof, but people who believe in God you say aren't allowed to do so. How logical is that?

reply to post by SuperiorEd


You wrote:

["Where are the claims of Zeus and Thor?"]

These fictive characters are described in various texts, and 'live' on Olympos and in Valhalla. Which you probably already knew, so yout question is rhetorical.

Quote: ["Where are there books that are read by billions of people."]

You can get these books in most libraries (rhetorics again), and how many who read them don't validate their content. There's no objective truth in numbers.

Quote: ["The Spaghetti monster gives us no indication of the physics he uses to create the universe."]

He most certainly does, but it requires a complete deformation of standard science to be able to follow it to its predetermined answer.

Quote: ["I say true to God because He makes the claims and then we back them up with our science."]

The key-words being 'we' and 'our science'. Unfortunately for 'you' (plural) and 'your science' real standard science is well-defined all the way, and has nothing to do with what you are talking about.

Quote: ["That's verification."]

For you.

Quote: ["God is good."]

A postulate. For me, he represents principles, which are the incarnation of evil.

Quote: ["He only requires that you bring your pride to equality with your fellow man in love of others."]

I don't operate with your premises.

Quote: ["God is one of the others."]

To the same extent as Zeus, Thor and the flying spaghetti monster are.

Quote: ["We have filled up pages with how God is good. Where are all the threads from Thor and Zeus?"]

No, YOU have filled pages with it. And does repetition of the same claims make them 'true'?

Quote: ["Where are all the people defending Him."]

Who is 'him'?

Quote: ["ATS is filled with pages of people standing up in honor of God as well as those wishing to steal, kill and destroy His message, just as He says would happen in His word."]

That's ONE way of arranging a situation in black/white: "Me good, you bad".

Quote: ["They are hated of all the nations around Her, just as God has said"]

With the 1.500+ years of behaviour as manifested by influential groups of the christianities, it would be surprising, it this wouldn't happen eventually. Some christian groups have had a special talent off being extremely unpleasant.

Quote: [" There is a world Government of tyranny forming,"]

There always is, and christianity has had its bid also (and failed). Now we have a medicine called egalitarian, liberal, secular democracy for the social illness ideological fascism.

Quote: ["They are hell bent on destroying God's kingdom, as stated in the Bible. You see, I provide you a good word here."]

Various types of the christianities are doing so well with destroying the reputation of their mythological ideals on their own, that extern help is un-necessary. Christianity as a major movement will implode from its own shortcomings in a few generations. (That's based on current statistical observations).

Quote: ["These are all verification of God's word."]

Only for those who already believe in them. And besides I would, from a non-believer position, call it self-reinforcement instead.

Quote: ["And, as God predicts, the lost of this generation will fall under a delusion and believe the lie of secular humanism."]

Yes, thanks 'god'.

Quote: ["1948 is your key date for this to begin. Read your history."]

You probably mean read YOUR history.

reply to post by SuperiorEd


You wrote:

["Awareness is needed for perspective to be broadened."]

And why must perspective be broadened, for what aim?

Quote: ["Science refuses the awareness of consciousness in the universe."]

It refuses the theist interpretation of 'awareness'. As to awareness per se, it exists, and is not denied, only not explained. But a 'self-organizing complexity' can turn out to be a good bid.

Quote: [" It assumes some happy accident or chemical reaction. No, the obvious conclusion is design and engineering at the nano level of complexity."]

It's an attractive option, though your version has run amok. Should you ever be able to recognize real science and logic, a moderate and rational exploration in that direction can be valuable.

Quote: ["It's in your face with proof and verification."]

Only according to you and a few other enthusiastic misusers of real science.

Quote: ["Nature proclaims God's goodness."]

No, he represents very evil principles.

Quote: ["No postulates here other than perfect reasoning and good old common sense."]

That's a postulate on top of a postulate.

Quote: ["Even science uses common sense."]

No.

Quote: ["All scientists will reluctantly acknowledge one truth: No conceivable experiment can confirm all our theories."]

I would prefer waiting with 'philosophy of science' until you know what even the simplest science is about in reality.

Quote: ["This places science in a position of faith."]

No. Faith operates without evidence. Science operates in relationship to the territory it has set out to describe.

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

Where are the claims of Zeus and Thor? Where are there books that are read by billions of people

thor

comics and cartoons and films and books

and there's this

true that

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

Sodom and Gomorrah would make the streets of Syria look like Disney. God is a just judge.

but bible god did take away their free will to live as they saw fit and all bible god did was destroy - a real powerful super intelligence would have found a better way - so bible god is not good

reply to post by SuperiorEd


Dear SuperiorEd,

God, be that the Hindu, Judaist, Christian, Islamic, Budhist, enter X/Y/Z religion here, God if he/she/it exists would be neither good, nor bad. He/she/it would be ambivalent.

Proof is easy enough - count all the atrocities in the world, all the uneccessary deaths, all the murders, rapes, violent crimes, etc.. etc.. and then you have the number of times God could have done something about it. Then take the number of recorded cases of miracles, unexplained cases of life being saved and subtract from the above number. The result, unless you are mathematically challenged, would be that God simply didn't do jack sh*t almost 100% of the times he/she/it could have. Hence, by simple logic, he/she/it doesn't give a sh*t.

Edit - Oh and SuperiorEd..quote: We can only assume the instances that we have direct evidence for in the Bible
You DO realise the Bible is not literal fact or historical truth, right? So .. basing anything you believe in on the "words" of the Bible is like believing the 7 dwarves in the Disney film Snow White really existed. Just thought i'd throw that spanner in your works. Do more research.

Moving on?

T

I one respect your are correct on ambivalence. God sits back and watches. You say that He could do something about evil and you are correct. He observes our choices after making His own.

The laws of nature are set. The story of destiny is set. Paradoxically, God puts the story into motion like a conductor and composer sets the stage with chairs, writes the music and prepares the auditorium for the audience. The key here is knowing who is who. God writes the master symphony. We are the musicians and the audience at the same time. We perform our part based on our appreciation of the aesthetically pleasing or displeasing quality of the performance. This is our job as the witness of the performance. We are also the musicians who perform based on our knowledge of music theory, our previous preparation and practice and our ability to transpose the notes on the page into a unique performance of our own.

The notes on the page are set. It is up to us to please the audience. The audience is us. God conducts and writes. The symphony is written. God assists us from the podium, but He cannot play our instruments for us. We can play in tune with truth or out of tune. We can play ahead of the music or behind. We can play too loudly or too softly. We can even refuse to show up for the performance. Either way, this does not change the master work we perform.

Originally posted by torqpoc
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

Dear SuperiorEd,

God, be that the Hindu, Judaist, Christian, Islamic, Budhist, enter X/Y/Z religion here, God if he/she/it exists would be neither good, nor bad. He/she/it would be ambivalent.

Proof is easy enough - count all the atrocities in the world, all the uneccessary deaths, all the murders, rapes, violent crimes, etc.. etc.. and then you have the number of times God could have done something about it. Then take the number of recorded cases of miracles, unexplained cases of life being saved and subtract from the above number. The result, unless you are mathematically challenged, would be that God simply didn't do jack sh*t almost 100% of the times he/she/it could have. Hence, by simple logic, he/she/it doesn't give a sh*t.

Edit - Oh and SuperiorEd..quote: We can only assume the instances that we have direct evidence for in the Bible
You DO realise the Bible is not literal fact or historical truth, right? So .. basing anything you believe in on the "words" of the Bible is like believing the 7 dwarves in the Disney film Snow White really existed. Just thought i'd throw that spanner in your works. Do more research.

Moving on?

T

edit on 12-7-2011 by torqpoc because: (no reason given)

I have answered this more clearly here. LINK

Originally posted by racasan

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

Sodom and Gomorrah would make the streets of Syria look like Disney. God is a just judge.

but bible god did take away their free will to live as they saw fit and all bible god did was destroy - a real powerful super intelligence would have found a better way - so bible god is not good

reply to post by SuperiorEd


Dear SuperiorEd,

As such are you therefore aggreeing to change your point of view from "God is good" to "God is ambivalent"?

From your last response it would seem to be that you follow the Urantia definition of God. That being of a creator being, rather than a philosphical or "religious" one. Yet you use the Bible to emphasize your points.

I would actually follow the belief that there may be a creator being, and that this being did indeed have a part in our creation, rather than a more darwinistic view, but the whole Adam/Eve Bible parody just doesn't fit into my version of things.

As to whether this being is actually still "watching" or "in control" I think the answer to that is no. If it were then this is one sordid, sadistic game it has chosen for us to play.

Thoughts?

T

Ambivalence is a state of having simultaneous, conflicting feelings toward a person or thing.

God loves us all. In spite of this, He must defend truth. He is good to all by working in time both ways. The conflict comes in with our character. He is in a state of having simultaneous, conflicting feelings toward us as we present our choices to Him. He considers our past as it affects our future. This is obvious from the pages of the Bible. As He cannot act evil, the tragedy is not for Him or by Him. It is our own choice affecting our future. He feels for us a love that goes beyond measure. At the same time, He must act according to His good nature. This requires actions that cause us pain but end to our credit in the future. The future only becomes good by the providence of God acting both way in time.

Saying that God is ambivalent suggests that He makes a choice and then regrets the choice. To our tiny minds, we see God looking out and making choices in time, so it appears that He is trapped in some sort of fixed predicament. This is not the case. God made His choices already. His choices are made before we arrive to see the results in the future. God is not in time as we see time. Go back an read my posts as I have covered this. God is outside of time, but can also change the fourth dimension from any point in that chain of events. This is evidenced by what we read in the Bible.

The Book tells the future. This means God has been there. He draws this knowledge into the past and leaves it there for us to see as it passes back by our perspective of 'now'. We have this ability as well, except ours is reversed. God goes both ways. We can draw our past into the future as a new choice made. If we don't like something we have done, we simply make a better choice by moving a new choice to the future and watching it work back as our new past. Can we see the future from the past? Somewhat. Can God see our future based on our choices, even from the past? Absolutely. This causes Him the conflict. He sees it both ways and mourns for our choices. His work is to work from both ends to ensure that 'now' is safe for everyone. Again, we are not able to fully see this in action.

Think about it. You'll see what I say is true.

Originally posted by torqpoc
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

Dear SuperiorEd,

As such are you therefore aggreeing to change your point of view from "God is good" to "God is ambivalent"?

From your last response it would seem to be that you follow the Urantia definition of God. That being of a creator being, rather than a philosphical or "religious" one. Yet you use the Bible to emphasize your points.

I would actually follow the belief that there may be a creator being, and that this being did indeed have a part in our creation, rather than a more darwinistic view, but the whole Adam/Eve Bible parody just doesn't fit into my version of things.

As to whether this being is actually still "watching" or "in control" I think the answer to that is no. If it were then this is one sordid, sadistic game it has chosen for us to play.

Thoughts?

T

You poor dear.

Sorry. I hear constantly all over the web many people desperately trying to justify their religious views, from theistic Buddhism to Islam to the viewpoint you're defending. They use excellent grammar (you're an example), large vocabulary, and all that good stuff. Yours is just another one of the arguments. I have judged it false...

This Christian God; I want nothing to do with it in my life. Your strange answers have done nothing but strengthen my disbelief. Thank you.

One thing is for sure: If these seeds are rotten, then they won't grow.

Originally posted by WhiteLaces
You poor dear.

Sorry. I hear constantly all over the web many people desperately trying to justify their religious views, from theistic Buddhism to Islam to the viewpoint you're defending. They use excellent grammar (you're an example), large vocabulary, and all that good stuff. Yours is just another one of the arguments. I have judged it false...

This Christian God; I want nothing to do with it in my life. Your strange answers have done nothing but strengthen my disbelief. Thank you.

Wow.

Seek mental help.

Good Day.

Sincerely and Dearly,

WhiteLaces

reply to post by SuperiorEd

My challenge for the Atheist is simple. Give me your logic and reasoning for God’s ability to hate anyone enough to send them to hell.

No, instead I will give you my logic and reasoning for God being BAD, as that was your thread title. I'm not here to argue about God hating people and sending them to hell, you said he was good and that you will defend him, so I will prove to you that he is bad.

First off, the obvious one: "Thou shalt not kill", oops, looks like this omnipotent hypocrite broke his own rule. God killed 2,270,365+ people in the Bible. It doesn't matter if every one of those is a sick, psychopathic rapist who tortures the innocent and brutally murders children, he still killed over 2 million people. I could stop right there, that is proof that God is not good, but I'll continue.

I will paste at random a few atrocities from this website:

--EX 12:29 The Lord kills all the first-born in the land of Egypt.

What a good guy

--EX 21:20-21 With the Lord's approval, a slave may be beaten to death with no punishment for the perpetrator as long as the slave doesn't die too quickly.

That's a very considerate, loving deity you have!

--EX 32:27-29 With the Lord's approval, the Israelites slay 3000 men.

--NU 11:33 The Lord smites the people with a great plague.

If somebody developed an incredibly contagious and dangerous virus that was spreading like wildfire and killing millions, would you consider that person who is responsible a good guy? If I hopped in a plane and started Anthrax-dusting a community, would you say "That is a loving, good person right there"?

--NU 16:35 A fire from the Lord consumes 250 men.

That's nothing compared to the eternal torture and burning in hell for not worshipping him

--JS 8:22-25 With the Lord's approval, Joshua utterly smites the people of Ai, killing 12,000 men and women, so that there were none who escaped.

--JS 10:10-27 With the help of the Lord, Joshua utterly destroys the Gibeonites.

--JS 10:28 With the Lord's approval, Joshua utterly destroys the people of Makkedah.

--JS 10:30 With the Lord's approval, Joshua utterly destroys the Libnahites.

--JS 10:32-33 With the Lord's approval, Joshua utterly destroys the people of Lachish.

--JS 10:34-35 With the Lord's approval, Joshua utterly destroys the Eglonites.

--JS 10:36-37 With the Lord's approval, Joshua utterly destroys the Hebronites.

--JS 10:38-39 With the Lord's approval, Joshua utterly destroys the Debirites.

Wow Joshua was kicking ass and taking names, all thanks to the Lord. Those murders were....good, right? If God approved it, and he's good, then surely murdering entire ethnic groups is good, right? Have you met Adolf Hitler? He had a similar outlook on the world, and that worked out pretty nicely, huh? What about apartheid? Also good? If you think God is good despite condoning the slaying of ethnic groups, then do you think Hitler and DF Malan are good?

--JG 1:6 With the Lord's approval, Judah pursues Adoni-bezek, catches him, and cuts off his thumbs and big toes.

--2SA 24:15 The Lord sends a pestilence on Israel that kills 70,000 men.

That is just a tiny fraction of the atrocities committed and approved by your God.

"God is GOOD" [atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a7cb150f1037.jpg[/atsimg]

You most likely misunderstood me. The seed are my words. I was implying that if they are not truth, then they will not grow and produce anything. Rotten seeds do not grow. I happen to believe that they are truth. America is the marketplace of ideas so we are all better for expressing our opinions.

Originally posted by WhiteLaces
Wow.

Seek mental help.

Good Day.

Sincerely and Dearly,

WhiteLaces

You've proved nothing. All you've done is show how many people died during those wars. I guess people aren't suppose to die during battle. Why not read the whole story and maybe you would see why those men got killed.

Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

My challenge for the Atheist is simple. Give me your logic and reasoning for God’s ability to hate anyone enough to send them to hell.

No, instead I will give you my logic and reasoning for God being BAD, as that was your thread title. I'm not here to argue about God hating people and sending them to hell, you said he was good and that you will defend him, so I will prove to you that he is bad.

First off, the obvious one: "Thou shalt not kill", oops, looks like this omnipotent hypocrite broke his own rule. God killed 2,270,365+ people in the Bible. It doesn't matter if every one of those is a sick, psychopathic rapist who tortures the innocent and brutally murders children, he still killed over 2 million people. I could stop right there, that is proof that God is not good, but I'll continue.

I will paste at random a few atrocities from this website:

--EX 12:29 The Lord kills all the first-born in the land of Egypt.

What a good guy

--EX 21:20-21 With the Lord's approval, a slave may be beaten to death with no punishment for the perpetrator as long as the slave doesn't die too quickly.

That's a very considerate, loving deity you have!

--EX 32:27-29 With the Lord's approval, the Israelites slay 3000 men.

--NU 11:33 The Lord smites the people with a great plague.

If somebody developed an incredibly contagious and dangerous virus that was spreading like wildfire and killing millions, would you consider that person who is responsible a good guy? If I hopped in a plane and started Anthrax-dusting a community, would you say "That is a loving, good person right there"?

--NU 16:35 A fire from the Lord consumes 250 men.

That's nothing compared to the eternal torture and burning in hell for not worshipping him

--JS 8:22-25 With the Lord's approval, Joshua utterly smites the people of Ai, killing 12,000 men and women, so that there were none who escaped.

--JS 10:10-27 With the help of the Lord, Joshua utterly destroys the Gibeonites.

--JS 10:28 With the Lord's approval, Joshua utterly destroys the people of Makkedah.

--JS 10:30 With the Lord's approval, Joshua utterly destroys the Libnahites.

--JS 10:32-33 With the Lord's approval, Joshua utterly destroys the people of Lachish.

--JS 10:34-35 With the Lord's approval, Joshua utterly destroys the Eglonites.

--JS 10:36-37 With the Lord's approval, Joshua utterly destroys the Hebronites.

--JS 10:38-39 With the Lord's approval, Joshua utterly destroys the Debirites.

Wow Joshua was kicking ass and taking names, all thanks to the Lord. Those murders were....good, right? If God approved it, and he's good, then surely murdering entire ethnic groups is good, right? Have you met Adolf Hitler? He had a similar outlook on the world, and that worked out pretty nicely, huh? What about apartheid? Also good? If you think God is good despite condoning the slaying of ethnic groups, then do you think Hitler and DF Malan are good?

--JG 1:6 With the Lord's approval, Judah pursues Adoni-bezek, catches him, and cuts off his thumbs and big toes.

--2SA 24:15 The Lord sends a pestilence on Israel that kills 70,000 men.

That is just a tiny fraction of the atrocities committed and approved by your God.

"God is GOOD" [atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a7cb150f1037.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by TupacShakur


I don't speak for God as to His choices in history. What I can say is that He gives us warning as to our stupidity and poor choices. The laws of God are there to honor, protect and defend truth and freedom of choice for those who honor others. This is His law. I cannot judge this law because it is correct and what I expect from my own leaders and countrymen.

EX 12:29 The Lord kills all the first-born in the land of Egypt.

Consider the fact that the Egyptians and Pharaoh had persisted in their pride through the first 9 plagues. The tenth is the final judgment on them. It was their choice. God followed through with His promise. He always does, but not before He gives us every chance to learn.

The ancient lands were all about naming who's hands the blood was on. Pharaoh made the choice, knowing what was about to happen. The command was given as a demonstration against the false beliefs of the Egyptians. Each plague was representative of a false god in Egypt. Answered HERE

EX 21:20-21 With the Lord's approval, a slave may be beaten to death with no punishment for the perpetrator as long as the slave doesn't die too quickly.

Its easy to point out problems by our own morality. We do this without checking our facts most often. Slavery in Israel was punishment for crimes committed against fellow Hebrews. Slaves were also bonded to masters if they were in debt and unable to pay. This was a rare thing since all debt is forgiven every 7 years. Slaves were also bonded if they desired to be a worker for a land owner. This equivalent to what we do with migrants today.

--EX 32:27-29 With the Lord's approval, the Israelites slay 3000 men.

You must realize that the ancient time when Israel traveled in Egypt represented a demonstration of God's stand against sin to all generations that would follow. Here is Matthew Henry's commentary on this verse:

"Never did any wise man make a more frivolous and foolish excuse than that of Aaron. We must never be drawn into sin by any thing man can say or do to us; for men can but tempt us to sin, they cannot force us. The approach of Moses turned the dancing into trembling. They were exposed to shame by their sin. The course Moses took to roll away this reproach, was, not by concealing the sin, or putting any false colour upon it, but by punishing it. The Levites were to slay the ringleaders in this wickedness; yet none were executed but those who openly stood forth. Those are marked for ruin who persist in sin: those who in the morning were shouting and dancing, before night were dying. Such sudden changes do the judgments of the Lord sometimes make with sinners that are secure and jovial in their sin."

--NU 11:33 The Lord smites the people with a great plague.

The Matthew Henry Commentary is your best source on these matters. He says it like it is:

"God performed his promise to the people, in giving them flesh. How much more diligent men are in collecting the meat that perishes, than in labouring for meat which endures to everlasting life! We are quick-sighted in the affairs of time; but stupidity blinds us as to the concerns of eternity. To pursue worldly advantages, we need no arguments; but when we are to secure the true riches, then we are all forgetfulness. Those who are under the power of a carnal mind, will have their lusts fulfilled, though it be to the certain damage and ruin of their precious souls. They paid dearly for their feasts. God often grants the desires of sinners in wrath, while he denies the desires of his own people in love. What we unduly desire, if we obtain it, we have reason to fear, will be some way or other a grief and cross to us. And what multitudes there are in all places, who shorten their lives by excess of one kind or other! Let us seek for those pleasures which satisfy, but never surfeit; and which will endure for evermore."

--NU 16:35 A fire from the Lord consumes 250 men.

"A fire went out from the Lord, and consumed the two hundred and fifty men that offered incense, while Aaron, who stood with them, was preserved alive. God is jealous of the honour of his own institutions, and will not have them invaded. The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord. The censers are devoted, and, as all devoted things, must be made serviceable to the glory of God. This covering of the altar would remind the children of Israel of this event, that others might hear and fear, and do no more presumptuously. They brought destruction on themselves both in body and soul. Thus all who break the law and neglect the gospel choose and love death."

I will save space here and just let the above serve to support the claim. God is good, always. He is good because he has requirements that ensure that all people are given the opportunity for freedom of choice to live in a world that is safe. His requirements are not by our morality, but ultimately protect those who are of loving hearts. He goes against pride when it is aimed at those He loves or those who openly fight against Him. Like it or not, this is good. It is all done for our benefit and education in times to come. The choice is always up to the individual to honor, protect and defend with Him or steal, kill and destroy against Him. Either way, He is good for defending truth and justice for those who He loves and who love Him.

reply to post by RealTruthSeeker

You've proved nothing.

I've definitely proved something. I've proved that God has killed 2,270,365+ people in the Bible, many in disgustingly inhumane ways.

All you've done is show how many people died during those wars.

Maybe you missed these from my last post: "With the Lords approval"

Why not read the whole story and maybe you would see why those men got killed.

You also must have missed this from my last post: "God killed 2,270,365+ people in the Bible. It doesn't matter if every one of those is a sick, psychopathic rapist who tortures the innocent and brutally murders children, he still killed over 2 million people."

There were some questions that you didn't answer in that post too:

"--NU 11:33 The Lord smites the people with a great plague.

If somebody developed an incredibly contagious and dangerous virus that was spreading like wildfire and killing millions, would you consider that person who is responsible a good guy? If I hopped in a plane and started Anthrax-dusting a community, would you say "That is a loving, good person right there"?"

"Wow Joshua was kicking ass and taking names, all thanks to the Lord. Those murders were....good, right? If God approved it, and he's good, then surely murdering entire ethnic groups is good, right? Have you met Adolf Hitler? He had a similar outlook on the world, and that worked out pretty nicely, huh? What about apartheid? Also good? If you think God is good despite condoning the slaying of ethnic groups, then do you think Hitler and DF Malan are good?"

Originally posted by TupacShakur

Once again you have proved nothing, apparently still haven't read the whole story. I guess if a bunch of thugs came to your area and started beating you up for no reason you'd just sit back and get beat up. Maybe the Americans should have never dropped the bomb on Hiroshima or Nagasaki, of course I'm sure that doesn't matter, after all the Americans only killed 90,000–166,000 killed in Hiroshima and 60,000–80,000 killed in Nagasaki. I guess man is the only one allowed to perform such acts without reason.

reply to post by SuperiorEd

God is good, always. He is good because he has requirements that ensure that all people are given the opportunity for freedom of choice to live in a world that is safe. His requirements are not by our morality, but ultimately protect those who are of loving hearts. He goes against pride when it is aimed at those He loves or those who openly fight against Him. Like it or not, this is good. It is all done for our benefit and education in times to come. The choice is always up to the individual to honor, protect and defend with Him or steal, kill and destroy against Him. Either way, He is good for defending truth and justice for those who He loves and who love Him.

He killed over 2 million people in the Bible. Arguing to justify that is beyond sick and delusional. I could do the same for dictators!

Hitler is good, always. Hitler is good because he has requirements that ensure that all people are given the opportunity for freedom of choice to live in a world that is safe. Hitlers requirements are not by our morality, but ultimately protect those who are of loving hearts, the Aryans and German people. Hitler goes against pride when it is aimed at those He loves, his people, or those who openly fight against Him, primarily the Jews. Like it or not, this is good. It is all done for our benefit and education in times to come. The choice is always up to the individual to honor, protect and defend with Hitler or steal, kill and destroy against Him. Either way, Hitler is good for defending truth and justice for those who He loves and who love Him.

"I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord." --Adolf Hitler

Consider the fact that the Egyptians and Pharaoh had persisted in their pride through the first 9 plagues. The tenth is the final judgment on them. It was their choice. God followed through with His promise. He always does, but not before He gives us every chance to learn.

Sounds a lot like gang members or the mafia threatening people to pay for protection. If they get their place of business burnt to the ground, tough s***, because it was their choice. The mafia followed through with their promise. They always do, but they gave the business owner a chance to learn after they beat him up beforehand, but his pride persisted.

Is it justifiable in that case? Or can only God be above his own laws?

The ancient lands were all about naming who's hands the blood was on. Pharaoh made the choice, knowing what was about to happen. The command was given as a demonstration against the false beliefs of the Egyptians. Each plague was representative of a false god in Egypt. Answered HERE

That is sick! What an egotistical, selfish God, "Woship me or die!!!!". I really hope he exists so I can tell him off before he sends me to hell for bashing his flawed religion my whole life.

Its easy to point out problems by our own morality. We do this without checking our facts most often. Slavery in Israel was punishment for crimes committed against fellow Hebrews. Slaves were also bonded to masters if they were in debt and unable to pay. This was a rare thing since all debt is forgiven every 7 years. Slaves were also bonded if they desired to be a worker for a land owner. This equivalent to what we do with migrants today.

...OK? Thanks for the history lesson. "With the Lords approval a slave may be beaten to death with no punishment for the perpetrator as long as the slave doesn't die too quickly." Yeah we totally beat migrants into a slow and painful death today.

You must realize that the ancient time when Israel traveled in Egypt represented a demonstration of God's stand against sin to all generations that would follow.

That's very noble and whatever, but going around slaughtering millions is not justifiable! If any living person did that today, they would go down in history as one of the most evil people to walk the earth.

God is good, always

Refer to those 2,270,365+ people that he killed and keep telling yourself that, buddy. You'd be better off trying to convince me that torturing and raping infants is good.

He is good because he has requirements that ensure that all people are given the opportunity for freedom of choice to live in a world that is safe.

Yeah the world is real safe with God pouting and killing hundreds of thousands of people because they didn't give him enough attention or didn't follow his little rulebook.

Like it or not, this is good.

No you've just been brainwashed and conditioned to think it's good after being a part of your religion for your whole life. If you're a part of an organized religion and you're pretty serious about it, you're not going to talk s*** on it. If you were born in the Middle East somewhere where members of your community went around killing children and families of another religion, you would justify it and argue that it's good because Muhammed wants to cleanse the earth of those who don't follow his rules or whatever.

It is all done for our benefit and education in times to come.

Of course, because the Church definitely didn't suppress any science that went against their teachings that they interpreted from the Bible for hundreds of years, did they?

When you die, there will be no afterlife, the brain shuts off and that's it. It'll be just like before you were born: nothingness. Until proof other than a two thousand year old book is presented, the Bible and all organized religions for that matter will be fairy-tales. Theories with no evidence to back them up are just speculation. I can speculate on the creation of the universe: An inter-dimensional robotic chameleon farted, causing anti-matter to collide with a supermassive black hole, spawning the universe. I have a comic book that details this, therefore I will devote my life to worshipping Thomas the Chameleon.

There are too many flaws in religion for me to even consider believing in it, let alone arguing to defend the blood-thirsty, egotistical, hypocritical serial murderer within the Bible.