God does not follow the first principle of morality. Why not?

In my opinion, the concept of calling God immoral because He does not conform to human ideas of morality, at times acted to eliminate certain people from the earth, or continues to allow humans to suffer and commit atrocities, even against children and babies without intervening seems to happen when people attempt to view God as an equal rather than an existence being in control of and knowing the "big picture" of why certain things are allowed to happen. For example, God is not "killing" by allowing the death of children, after all He would know and possibly have a reason for allowing physical death and can take care of souls He created. Humans do not have this authority over another, that is why we are told not to kill each other because we are not equal in authority or wisdom to God!

An example of perspective is when a small child perceives a parent to be "mean" for discipline or not allowing the child to do something that a parent can do for their own good and safety. A small child doesn't understand the big picture so what is actually the best in the long term is not perceived as good at the moment.

The bible tells us that one day in God's time is one thousand years to us. That means if you live to be 100 years old you have only lived the equivalent of 10% of one day in God’s time. Putting that in perspective, if someone only lived 10% of our 24 hour day, it would amount to living only for 2.4 hours. So it appears that even a full lifetime to us is very insignificant to God, in fact, it appears that we are all babies to Him even when we die in old age in our timeframe. This is probably why the bible tells us that the wisdom of men is foolishness to God.

I wish more people could admit that we are all just trying to learn and find our way to the truth about these things instead of being arrogant and abrasive with others with different opinions. This goes for arrogant and abrasive people from all religions, atheists, etc.! How many people who bash each other can prove beyond a doubt that God does or does not exist or that their holy texts, science books or research have not been corrupted by other humans?

To me it's all interesting to learn, come to my own understanding, then change my mind when I learn some more.

Originally posted by TZela
In my opinion, the concept of calling God immoral because He has at times acted to eliminate certain people from the earth, or continues to allow humans to commit atrocities, even against children and babies without intervening seems to happen when people attempt to view God as an equal rather than an existence being in control of and knowing the "big picture" of why certain things are allowed to happen. God is not "killing" by allowing death, after all He would know and possibly have a reason for allowing physical death and can take care of souls He created. Humans do not have this authority over another, that is why we are told not to kill each other because we are not equal in authority or wisdom to God!

Think of the Earth as a 'proving ground'. God instructed his followers to intervene on the behalf of the poor and oppressed.

You who profess to believe God are probably the only way unbelievers will ever see God. When they see a Christian for example, having a nice home, nice car, many possessions, like big screen TV, great hobbies, weekend getaways, etc, when instead, they could have got a lot less for themselves, basic/cheap house, cheap old car, few possession, bare essentials only, no hobbies so they can give a lot more to God, the gospel, and the poor.....

....But instead choose to keep most of their earnings, neglect, God, neglect the gospel, and neglect the poor. Neglect the poor espeically in disobedience to God. What would people see? What would God feel? That God would see that is followers is making Him look so evil!

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Imaginary constructs like God cannot intervene in anything and fear mongering like you just did is rather childish and any intelligent adult will recognize it as such..

The end of this clip is just made for you.

www.youtube.com...

Regards
DL

Just beacuse the bible should not be taken literaly as thruth does not mean Richard Dawkins know anything about god . Richard Dawkins is as caught up in Scientific blind dogma as Christian fundamentalists are caught up in Christian dogma. The day he said mumbo jumbo was the day I stopped listening to him . He always shows the most riduculed version of something his mind cannot allow to be real to dissrupt any true scientific study of it. He is doing from my point of view the same thing as the Catholic chruch did to Galileo Galilei. It is funny when science become the oppresser of true discovery and understanding of what is real. The human ego always get in the way of seeking the thruth behind everything.

reply to post by ahnggk

Yes I agree it’s not right when people are hypocritical and speak one thing and live another. I do not belong to any church so I’m not too worried about how other self professing Christians make God look to other people. And more importantly, if God is real then what people think of Him does not change reality. The point I was making is that even when God does not always intervene with miracles to save a life or feed the poor at the time of suffering it does not mean God is immoral. I believe humans have only a very limited understanding of total truth so I personally think it is impossible to accurately judge the actions and character of God at this time.

Originally posted by TZela
In my opinion, the concept of calling God immoral because He does not conform to human ideas of morality, at times acted to eliminate certain people from the earth, or continues to allow humans to suffer and commit atrocities, even against children and babies without intervening seems to happen when people attempt to view God as an equal rather than an existence being in control of and knowing the "big picture" of why certain things are allowed to happen. For example, God is not "killing" by allowing the death of children, after all He would know and possibly have a reason for allowing physical death and can take care of souls He created. Humans do not have this authority over another, that is why we are told not to kill each other because we are not equal in authority or wisdom to God!

An example of perspective is when a small child perceives a parent to be "mean" for discipline or not allowing the child to do something that a parent can do for their own good and safety. A small child doesn't understand the big picture so what is actually the best in the long term is not perceived as good at the moment.

The bible tells us that one day in God's time is one thousand years to us. That means if you live to be 100 years old you have only lived the equivalent of 10% of one day in God’s time. Putting that in perspective, if someone only lived 10% of our 24 hour day, it would amount to living only for 2.4 hours. So it appears that even a full lifetime to us is very insignificant to God, in fact, it appears that we are all babies to Him even when we die in old age in our timeframe. This is probably why the bible tells us that the wisdom of men is foolishness to God.

I wish more people could admit that we are all just trying to learn and find our way to the truth about these things instead of being arrogant and abrasive with others with different opinions. This goes for arrogant and abrasive people from all religions, atheists, etc.! How many people who bash each other can prove beyond a doubt that God does or does not exist or that their holy texts, science books or research have not been corrupted by other humans?

To me it's all interesting to learn, come to my own understanding, then change my mind when I learn some more.

edit on 7-10-2012 by TZela because: spelling

edit on 7-10-2012 by TZela because: wording

What makes you think you can learn more of your God when you cannot accept what scriptures say?

You seem to think it strange that man can and should judge God and his morals. Can peers not judge each other in your book?
Does the majority not rule in questions of morality?

Yes they should and do.

God himself said that we, through A & E, have inherited the moral sense he has through the eating of the tree of knowledge. We are becoming as God. His own words.

When God kills as he often does, he is definitely acting in an immoral way because we both know that your imaginary construct can cure just as easily as he can kill and that killing is the immoral choice when he makes it.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by apushforenlightment

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Imaginary constructs like God cannot intervene in anything and fear mongering like you just did is rather childish and any intelligent adult will recognize it as such..

The end of this clip is just made for you.

www.youtube.com...

Regards
DL

Just beacuse the bible should not be taken literaly as thruth does not mean Richard Dawkins know anything about god

. Richard Dawkins is as caught up in Scientific blind dogma as Christian fundamentalists are caught up in Christian dogma. The day he said mumbo jumbo was the day I stopped listening to him

. He always shows the most riduculed version of something his mind cannot allow to be real to dissrupt any true scientific study of it. He is doing from my point of view the same thing as the Catholic chruch did to Galileo Galilei. It is funny when science become the oppresser of true discovery and understanding of what is real. The human ego always get in the way of seeking the thruth behind everything.

We are all fundamental to how we think. Be we a Dawkins or a Christian. All of us are hard to turn to new thinking.

You compare apples and oranges in saying that science is treating religion in the heinous way that Christianity treated Galileo and many others.

Science does not ask that belief be given to issues the go beyond physics and nature the way Christianity demands. Science does not as for belief in fantasy, miracles and magic. They do not say that their philosophy should be followed on the strength of talking snakes and donkeys or a water walking God who uses genocide against mankind and even has his son needlessly murdered yet remains the epitome of morality.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Greatest I am

Originally posted by apushforenlightment

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Imaginary constructs like God cannot intervene in anything and fear mongering like you just did is rather childish and any intelligent adult will recognize it as such..

The end of this clip is just made for you.

www.youtube.com...

Regards
DL

Just beacuse the bible should not be taken literaly as thruth does not mean Richard Dawkins know anything about god

. Richard Dawkins is as caught up in Scientific blind dogma as Christian fundamentalists are caught up in Christian dogma. The day he said mumbo jumbo was the day I stopped listening to him

. He always shows the most riduculed version of something his mind cannot allow to be real to dissrupt any true scientific study of it. He is doing from my point of view the same thing as the Catholic chruch did to Galileo Galilei. It is funny when science become the oppresser of true discovery and understanding of what is real. The human ego always get in the way of seeking the thruth behind everything.

We are all fundamental to how we think. Be we a Dawkins or a Christian. All of us are hard to turn to new thinking.

You compare apples and oranges in saying that science is treating religion in the heinous way that Christianity treated Galileo and many others.

Science does not ask that belief be given to issues the go beyond physics and nature the way Christianity demands. Science does not as for belief in fantasy, miracles and magic. They do not say that their philosophy should be followed on the strength of talking snakes and donkeys or a water walking God who uses genocide against mankind and even has his son needlessly murdered yet remains the epitome of morality.

Regards
DL

Some things that are labeled as magic/supernatural is just things that science have not discovered yeet or made sure to avoid researching. I do not like the Christianety box as the whole thruth but I do no either like Richard Dawkins box either. Einstein. There is a seeker of thruth in both science and spirituality. What a mind that person had and that intuition to know hidden thruths.

reply to post by Greatest I am


Actually I didn’t say it was strange for people to judge God, but rather I believe it is impossible for people to accurately judge God's character and actions with the limited knowledge we currently have concerning life, death, universe, etc.

If you want to judge God as a peer that is your determination, my understanding and belief right now is that humans are not equal to God as peers.

Concerning your questions about accepting scripture and learning about God. As far as I'm aware, in the bible God does not offer divine protection or promise that written scripture will remain uncorrupted. In fact, several warnings of punishment for adding to or taking away of His word highly suggests that God knows corruption will happen and will allow it to happen. With that in mind and taken in context with the whole bible, I believe the references in the bible to scripture being pure obviously are referring to their origin.

However that does not mean I cannot learn about God from the bible or that I think the whole bible we read today is inaccurate. It does not mean that God cannot influence or guide people who are wary that corruption may have occured within the bible. However, knowing this, I will keep an open mind and be open to the possibility of changing my mind and beliefs or that possibly I may not have the whole truth about everything. I'm not falling into the trap of vehemently defending any version of the bible as total God-inspired truth when I have absolutely no personal proof or evidence that corruption has not occurred. There are many articles detailing various scriptural misinterpretations, missing books, etc. Most churches will not promote this type of thinking because they would rather have unquestioning allegiance from their members.

Originally posted by apushforenlightment
[

Some things that are labeled as magic/supernatural is just things that science have not discovered yeet or made sure to avoid researching. I do not like the Christianety box as the whole thruth but I do no either like Richard Dawkins box either. Einstein. There is a seeker of thruth in both science and spirituality. What a mind that person had and that intuition to know hidden thruths.

Not hidden. Just not discovered yet but I know what you mean.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by TZela
reply to post by Greatest I am

 

Actually I didn’t say it was strange for people to judge God, but rather I believe it is impossible for people to accurately judge God's character and actions with the limited knowledge we currently have concerning life, death, universe, etc.

If you want to judge God as a peer that is your determination, my understanding and belief right now is that humans are not equal to God as peers.

Concerning your questions about accepting scripture and learning about God. As far as I'm aware, in the bible God does not offer divine protection or promise that written scripture will remain uncorrupted. In fact, several warnings of punishment for adding to or taking away of His word highly suggests that God knows corruption will happen and will allow it to happen. With that in mind and taken in context with the whole bible, I believe the references in the bible to scripture being pure obviously are referring to their origin.

However that does not mean I cannot learn about God from the bible or that I think the whole bible we read today is inaccurate. It does not mean that God cannot influence or guide people who are wary that corruption may have occured within the bible. However, knowing this, I will keep an open mind and be open to the possibility of changing my mind and beliefs or that possibly I may not have the whole truth about everything. I'm not falling into the trap of vehemently defending any version of the bible as total God-inspired truth when I have absolutely no personal proof or evidence that corruption has not occurred. There are many articles detailing various scriptural misinterpretations, missing books, etc. Most churches will not promote this type of thinking because they would rather have unquestioning allegiance from their members.

No argument for sure. But two things came to mind.

You say that we cannot know the full extent of what God knows and that is an assumption based on the super miracle working God that we have been sold. What they have sold to literalist is fantasy, miracles and magic and a genocidal son murderer. I reject that God and so should any moral man. The bible does say though that we can know what he does in the moral sense and that is what should be important to us. God, in myth, dais that A & E had become as Gods in the knowing of good and evil. That is the biblical birth rite that we all have so to say we cannot know what God knows in moral terms would be un-biblical.

At the same time, there is moral wisdom in the bible but you have to reverse the Christian take of it to get it. Remember that Christianity reversed much of what the Jews thought so it must be reversed again to see the right morals.

As to your search for God in scriptures. Remember that scriptures themselves tell you that you will not find God there and that to seek him, you must look to nature and your own heart. Pondering what the bible says has value but the larger truth is not in it. Look to nature and yourself as we are all part of an evolving perfection and are always in the best of all possible worlds.

I like to use the term evolving perfection. Otherwise, a perfect God becomes a stagnant pool of information and our souls and consciousness would be useless to the universe.
Evolving, the perfection of whatever God was, to whatever God will be, means we have to think this way.

Unless you see God as somehow losing his initial perfection.
This is not allowed in a perfect God’s repertoire.


When this was written, most thought it to just be a cynical view of life but I think it is quite true and irrefutable, based on the anthropic principle.
What do you think?

Candide.

"It is demonstrable that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as all things have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for the best end.”

www.youtube.com...

This is done by nature and not a God but would be a requirement of a God if he were real.


Regards
DL

reply to post by Greatest I am


Your post is very thought provoking and definitely made me think outside of the box about this.

I agree that A&E, according to scripture, became “as gods”, however it seems they were in the unique position of having direct conversations with “God” in a way that the majority of humans do not. This is like the difference between knowing and interacting with someone face to face on a daily basis versus reading about them in a book or learning about them in some indirect way such as studying their work (in this instance God’s creation – nature) We can know good and evil, but having free will we are not forced to choose good or evil.

If I understand the basic anthropic principal, it is stating that the universe exists for the purpose of sustaining human life. I think what you are saying is because we consciously observe a world of imperfection, good and evil, that God as creator also cannot be absolutely perfect, but rather that we are all evolving toward perfection as one right now together? While this is possible, our universe could in essence be like a fishbowl evolving one way or another, with a perfect God entity separate and observing this creation and possibly other separate universe creations without being subject to the all of the conditions and imperfections of their existence. I guess this would be like a variation of the “multiverse” principle.

In the bible we are told that God created humans from the physical, making them subject to a necessary physical environment. He also created spirit beings mentioned in the bible. Because we do not understand the forces and conditions necessary to maintain their type of spirit life, then we must assume our universe and possibly even earth atmosphere must accommodate their existence as well, because we are told some were “cast to earth” at some point in time. Perhaps there are actually more of them than us existing in our universe.

As some of these spirit beings appear to have free will, for example, to rebel and influence humans then the presence of evil in our universe may result from living in their best possible world at the present time.

I always wondered the "morality" lol if there is such thing in the bible...

There is anti-gay statement

There is slavery

There is killing an death and torture...


But damn.. nothing against pedophilia. Gods words my butt lol, it seems to me like 2000yr horny men's words.

reply to post by luciddream


I Corinthians 7:36 But if any man thinks he is behaving improperly toward his virgin, if she is past the flower of youth, and thus it must be, let him do what he wishes. He does not sin; let them marry.

Originally posted by TZela
reply to post by Greatest I am

 

Your post is very thought provoking and definitely made me think outside of the box about this.

I agree that A&E, according to scripture, became “as gods”, however it seems they were in the unique position of having direct conversations with “God” in a way that the majority of humans do not. This is like the difference between knowing and interacting with someone face to face on a daily basis versus reading about them in a book or learning about them in some indirect way such as studying their work (in this instance God’s creation – nature) We can know good and evil, but having free will we are not forced to choose good or evil.

If I understand the basic anthropic principal, it is stating that the universe exists for the purpose of sustaining human life. I think what you are saying is because we consciously observe a world of imperfection, good and evil, that God as creator also cannot be absolutely perfect, but rather that we are all evolving toward perfection as one right now together? While this is possible, our universe could in essence be like a fishbowl evolving one way or another, with a perfect God entity separate and observing this creation and possibly other separate universe creations without being subject to the all of the conditions and imperfections of their existence. I guess this would be like a variation of the “multiverse” principle.

In the bible we are told that God created humans from the physical, making them subject to a necessary physical environment. He also created spirit beings mentioned in the bible. Because we do not understand the forces and conditions necessary to maintain their type of spirit life, then we must assume our universe and possibly even earth atmosphere must accommodate their existence as well, because we are told some were “cast to earth” at some point in time. Perhaps there are actually more of them than us existing in our universe.

As some of these spirit beings appear to have free will, for example, to rebel and influence humans then the presence of evil in our universe may result from living in their best possible world at the present time.

Three things.

I thought that you said that you thought outside of your box. You did not.
The anthropic principle says nothing about the universe being here for us.
Finally, I will let this clip speak for me.

www.youtube.com...

Regards
DL

reply to post by Greatest I am

The anthropic principle says nothing about the universe being here for us

What?

In astrophysics and cosmology, the anthropic principle is the philosophical consideration that observations of the physical Universe must be compatible with the conscious life that observes it.

In a lecture titled "The Confusion of Cause and Effect in Bad Science," the paleophysicist Caroline Miller said:[60] "The Anthropic Principle is based on the underlying belief that the universe was created for our benefit

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by TZelaGod does not always intervene with miracles to save a life or feed the poor at the time of suffering it does not mean God is immoral. I believe humans have only a very limited understanding of total truth so I personally think it is impossible to accurately judge the actions and character of God at this time.

You got it right there.

Think of the Earth as a testing ground. We are all being tested and it is a very difficult test. If the tester intervened all the time, then it won't be a test anymore wouldn't it?

If all the answers are laid in front of us, then it's pointless evaluating, diligence, perseverance, long suffering, wisdom, loyalty, love, mercy, forgiveness, righteousness.

It is not in fullness we are tested but in lack. Our world is lacking the answers, but will you give up everything, even risk your life to find these answers?

Thousands of people die of hunger everyday, but the more important thing to consider is that some of them will find comfort in eternal life. That is why it's pointless for God to intervene, other than it would ruin the purpose of the test, those who have suffered will find comfort later on anyway and for much much longer..

Although I seem to speak of life has no value, remember, the test includes how we treat each other. If you took this test so easy, you will most certainly fail it. Neglected those poor, oppressed and kept the Gospel to yourself, you won't pass it either.

It means stop thinking God will stop these evil things from happening!! The evil and the good will both be repaid in full in the judgement!! What matters is, which side will you be in this difficult test?? Will you just pray that God feed those hungry, doing nothing yourself? Will you just pray for God to deliver those in bondage to the false religions?? Or will you risk your life preaching to places extremely hostile to the truth?

If God did everything instead of us, stopped evil, did miracles 24/7 in our lives, what would the quality of those entering the Kingdom of God be? You guessed it! Couch potatoes who treat God like their personal servant!!

"God" does not follow the first principle of morality because "he" is a computer.