Transparency

[topher694]

You spoke of a particular proof. At least thats how it read. I'm saying tailor another one to the intended audience.

But its also a fair question: what if a person is generally incapable of comprehending the divine. Well, that would be a sorry state for the person, if the stories are true about how much depends on it.

The "proof" didn't come from me, it was an general statement from the OP looking for a specific answer. I was just basically pointing out, through my questions, that he wasn't being consistent nor thinking things all the way through... but unsurprisingly, and ironically, he didn't get it.

 

[DamianWarS]

To consciously and purposefully inflict needless harm upon a human being is evil and immoral

Every human being on the face of the earth, minus the odd sociopath, adheres, with allowances for minor deviation in language, to this same standard

The God of the bible, unfortunately, does NOT adhere to this standard!

Example:

God chose to consciously and purposefully drown innocent babies, alongside the wicked, during the Great Flood

{i.e. God NEEDLESSLY inflicted harm upon those babies!!}

That said, I'm perfectly willing to accept that God might have had a morally valid reason for consciously and purposefully inflicting the harm of drowning upon those innocent babies

In other words, I'm perfectly willing to accept that the drowning of those babies was, after all, not even needless to begin with...

Assuming this is true - assuming that God NEEDED, after all, to drown those babies - my question is this:

Doesn't He {God} owe it to us to offer His explanation for having inflicted what seemingly appears {to us} to be a NEEDLESS harm?

Isn't this just common sense?

If you love someone and you truly desire for this someone to fully trust in and love you in return - don't you present yourself with full transparency?

Don't you at least make an effort?

this is morality based on humanism where humans are the highest honor. It shouldn't be a surprise that those who believe in and have value in God that he is considered the highest honor so morality is based on his glory not our own. There also is the idea of justice where death is not the final say with God and justice may still be given even after death. In a system without God people die unjustly and nothing corrects this but in a system with God justice continues after death.

If there is a God this makes sense and is important, if there isn't a God then God is in violation of nothing (because he doesn't exist). So the argument falls apart a bit. The moment we consider God in an argument we also need to consider how morality and justice are determined with the inclusion of God rather than continuing to base it on a system where there is no God (which doesn't make any sense) if there is a God then we need to consider what he brings to the table before we define morality but it's flawed to say God's morals don't work in a moral humanism vacuum. of course it doesn't work... why would it?

 

[renniks]

To consciously and purposefully inflict needless harm upon a human being is evil and immoral

Every human being on the face of the earth, minus the odd sociopath, adheres, with allowances for minor deviation in language, to this same standard

seriously?
Men are basically evil. Until you understand that you will not understand how God has dealt with them.
Of course God did have a reason. Many men only have thier depravity. Men enjoy inflicting harm. God even in the darkest days only did so when necessary.

 

[Treeplanter]

Well I’m on the thinking of a local event not a global event, Hebrew language is quite interesting

Scripture describes a global event wherein the entire human race {sans Noah & co} are consciously and purposefully wiped out by God

 

[Treeplanter]

No, actually three, who are one, etc...



Well, let's just start with the first one for now, etc...?

Do you even know what full omniscience from the very beginning even means, etc...? What it fully entails completely, etc...?



What if He both did and has done nothing after the very beginning, etc...?



Because God is a Trinity, because the Bible and Jesus said/says so, and He is not a lair, etc...

God Bless!

If God didn't know what what He was doing early on, then how can you be certain that He wasn't lying?

 

[Treeplanter]

Jesus talked about us either being slaves to sin, or else slaves to God, etc...

But as for people owning other people or not, I don't think He actually ever directly addressed it directly, etc...

But, a person who was a slave in Israel had a very, very good life most of the time, etc, so much so that if their masters would try and release them and/or send them away, or set them free, etc, they would all but beg to be able to continue with them and stay, etc, as there were many, many provisions/strict rules in the OT for the Israelites in how they treated their quote/unquote "slaves", etc, as they were more like "very willing servants", due to how well they had it and were treated, etc, they didn't want to leave or be set free, etc...



Ah, yes, your talking about God in the OT again, aren't you...?

Well, He was learning, and eventually learned you could not eliminate or do away with all sin by killing all of the sinners, etc, just didn't/doesn't work in the end, etc...

And Jesus I don't think ever directly addressed the topic of homosexuality directly and/or specifically, etc...?

Other than teaching/preaching general repentance from all sin in general or generally, etc...



We already talked about this with the flood in the OT already, etc...



Already addressed.

God Bless!

Whether it was directly addressed in the NT or not is irrelevant!

Do you deny that every most every Christian on Earth believes that Jesus Christ is morally opposed to owning human beings as property, killing homosexuals for their sexuality, and drowning babies?

The point is that God, in the OT, committed and commanded others to commit these very things!

 

[Treeplanter]

Either you breath to live or you don't, you tell me. My answer is directly related to yours. What's the problem? Can you dish it out, but can't take it?

Yes, I breathe to live

And your point is...?

And how, exactly, does this relate to me knowing what {as a Christian} your views are?

 

[Treeplanter]

You just demonstrated that you don't understand what any of those things actually are.

Please explain

 

[Treeplanter]

The "proof" didn't come from me, it was an general statement from the OP looking for a specific answer. I was just basically pointing out, through my questions, that he wasn't being consistent nor thinking things all the way through... but unsurprisingly, and ironically, he didn't get it.

There is NOTHING inconsistent nor not fully thought out in the OP!

Despite offending the human sensibility, God expects us to place our trust in Him

That He refuses to either:

1. Explain Himself in terms that we can understand
or
2. Provide us with the wherewithal to understand Him in the terms that He currently presents Himself

suggests that it is God, Himself, who is inconsistent and has failed to fully think things through

 

[Treeplanter]

Define "effort" for your scenario here. THANKS!!!

I cannot define "effort" for you, sorry...

All I can tell you is that God, if He wanted to, could very easily make it clear to each and every one of us that the harm He inflicts is needed {despite appearing needless}

However, He chooses not to

 

[Treeplanter]

this is morality based on humanism where humans are the highest honor.

Yes, I believe that man is the measure of all things

It shouldn't be a surprise that those who believe in and have value in God that he is considered the highest honor so morality is based on his glory not our own.

Any God worthy of our devotion would put us ahead of Himself - just like a human parent places his/her child first

There also is the idea of justice where death is not the final say with God and justice may still be given even after death. In a system without God people die unjustly and nothing corrects this but in a system with God justice continues after death.

Irrelevant

Will you praise me for pulling you out of your burning house even after discovering that it was I who consciously and purposefully set your house on fire?

That God gives us Heaven does not make up for God making life on earth a living hell

A good and just and loving God worthy of our devotion would never, ever cause us needless harm!

 

[Treeplanter]

seriously?
Men are basically evil. Until you understand that you will not understand how God has dealt with them.
Of course God did have a reason. Many men only have thier depravity. Men enjoy inflicting harm. God even in the darkest days only did so when necessary.

I feel sorry for you
I really do...

Man is NOT basically evil
Man is basically good

Dumb as a box of rocks - yes, but ultimately well intentioned nonetheless

I'll tell what is truly evil - it's telling people that they are inherently wicked and deserving of Hell

 

[topher694]

Yes, I breathe to live

And your point is...?

And how, exactly, does this relate to me knowing what {as a Christian} your views are?

Yes, I trust in Jesus. However, you don't just need to breath to live. You must eat, drink, move along with many other things to live. Suggesting that the entirety of Christianity boils down to "I trust in Jesus" is akin to saying the only thing I need to live is to breath.

To answer your other question in part. What you suggested earlier, that you know EXACTLY what I believe and Christianity boils down to, "trust in Jesus"... that what is called unsound logic or logic that doesn't follow. Basically it is taking premises that are true but using them to from a conclusion that cannot be logically derived from them. For example:
Bob is a human
humans are in California
Therefore, Bob is in California

The first two are true, yet this is logic that doesn't follow thus an invalid argument. This is what you did earlier for the reasons I outlined above. And, this is only one example. I've seen it more and more lately, not just with you.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I cannot define "effort" for you, sorry...

All I can tell you is that God, if He wanted to, could very easily make it clear to each and every one of us that the harm He inflicts is needed {despite appearing needless}

However, He chooses not to

And of course, I'm sure you realize that if God were to "show up," all the while remaining in full consistency (like a perfect God would) with the Messianic context He's placed into in the world (i.e. in relation to the person and work of Jesus), that the recipient of the gift of clarity.......................would be then fully willing to acknowledge God as Lord, bow in obeyance, understand the point of human suffering and, like Peter and Paul and the other Apostles, proceed to lay his or her life on the line for the sake of the Gospel, right?

Because, if we're actually going to talk about Christianity and not just offer up some philosophically vacuous lip-service about some conceptually amorphous "god of the philosophers who has let us down," then we'll fully realize that our overall context means that anytime God shows us to clarify something, then we are fully responsible for properly responding to Him, putting our lives on the line from that point forward.

So, God showing up = we will then put our lives on the line for Jesus.

You want this situation to obtain for all humanity then, instantly even, correct?

Frankly, I rather hope God DOESN'T show up to clarifty in that manner. I don't know that I or my wife or other family members are anywhere near willing or ready for God to show up and then require demands of us stemming from the clarity He might give us in having answered useful questions.

With Christianity, there are strings attached to questions that are divinely answered. From what I understand in the Bible, and particularly in the New Testament on the whole, we don't get to just wish for God to fill us in, and if He does so, just mosey on our way with American style freedom to live the rest of our lives out as we see fit (especially at the point of clear revelation). So, you can keep your "moment of desired revelation." I don't need that kind of demand placed on my life right now.

 

[Treeplanter]

Yes, I trust in Jesus. However, you don't just need to breath to live. You must eat, drink, move along with many other things to live. Suggesting that the entirety of Christianity boils down to "I trust in Jesus" is akin to saying the only thing I need to live is to breath.

To answer your other question in part. What you suggested earlier, that you know EXACTLY what I believe and Christianity boils down to, "trust in Jesus"... that what is called unsound logic or logic that doesn't follow. Basically it is taking premises that are true but using them to from a conclusion that cannot be logically derived from them. For example:
Bob is a human
humans are in California
Therefore, Bob is in California

The first two are true, yet this is logic that doesn't follow thus an invalid argument. This is what you did earlier for the reasons I outlined above. And, this is only one example. I've seen it more and more lately, not just with you.

I have heard many a Christian declare that Jesus Christ is their sustenance and that they move entirely as He leads them to move...

A denial that Christianity ultimately boils down to faith in Christ strikes me as nothing short than a "nit-picky" game of semantics...sure, there is more to the existence of a Christian than just following Christ, but there is NOTHING MORE IMPORTANT to a Christian than following Christ - am I wrong?

 

[Treeplanter]

And of course, I'm sure that whenever God were to "show up," all the while remaining in full consistency (like a perfect God would) with the Messianic context He's placed into in the world (i.e. in relation to the person and work of Jesus), that the recipient of the gift of clarity.......................would then be fully willing to acknowledge God as Lord, bow in obeyance, understand the point of human suffering and, like Peter and Paul and the other Apostles, then proceed to lay his or her life on the line, right?

Because, if we're actually going to talk about Christianity and not just offer up some philosophically vacuous lip-service about some conceptually amorphous "god of the philosophers who has let us down," then we'll fully realize that our overall context means that anytime God shows us to clarify something, then we are fully responsible for properly responding to Him, putting our lives on the line from that point forward.

So, God showing up = we will then put our lives on the line for Jesus.

You want this situation to obtain for all humanity then, correct?

Frankly, I rather hope God DOESN'T show up to clarifty in that manner. I don't know that I, nor especially my wife or other family, am anywhere near willing or ready for God to show up and then require demands of us stemming from the clarity He might give us in having answered useful questions.

With Christianity, there are strings attached to questions that are divinely answered. From what I understand in the Bible, and particularly in the New Testament on the whole, we don't get to just wish for God to fill us in, and if He does so, just mosey on our way with American style freedom to live the rest of our lives out as we see fit (especially at the point of clear revelation). So, you can keep your "moment of desired revelation." I don't need that kind of demand on my life right now.

A god that shows up and makes Himself and His actions and His motivations known to be fully beneficent is a god that I and every other non-sociopathic person can and would get behind!

That said, a god that demands, as a condition of our being clued in, that we 'put our lives on the line' for Him is NOT a god worthy of our devotion any more than a human parent who requires his/her child put their lives on the line in return for being similarly clued in to a particular parenting style!

"Strings attached"?
There shouldn't be any strings attached to a healthy relationship with a Heavenly Father!!

A "perfect God" is NOT constrained by any so-called "Messianic context"!!

 

[2PhiloVoid]

A god that shows up and makes Himself and His actions and His motivations known to be fully beneficent is a god that I and every other non-sociopathic person can and would get behind!

A god that demands, as a condition of our being clued in, that we 'put our lives on the line' for Him is NOT a god worthy of our devotion any more than a human parent who requires his/her child put their lives on the line in return for being similarly clued in to a particular parenting style!

"Strings attached"?
There shouldn't be any strings attached to a healthy relationship with a Heavenly Father!!

A "perfect God" is NOT constrained by any so-called "Messianic context"!!

And you're not talking about Christianity then, but rather about some philosophically extracted and abstracted concept of some divinity that I couldn't care less about, either.

As if you, or I, have ANY idea what "perfection" actually is or ever really could be......we don't.

 

[topher694]

I have heard many a Christian declare that Jesus Christ is their sustenance and that they move entirely as He leads them to move...

A denial that Christianity ultimately boils down to faith in Christ strikes me as nothing short than a "nit-picky" game of semantics...sure, there is more to the existence of a Christian than just following Christ, but there is NOTHING MORE IMPORTANT to a Christian than following Christ - am I wrong?

Yes, you are wrong

 

[Treeplanter]

And you're not talking about Christianity then, but rather about some philosophically extracted concept of some divinity that I couldn't care less about, either.

As if you, or I, have ANY idea what "perfection" actually is or ever could really be......

No, I am very much talking about the Christian God - the same one described in scripture

I may not fully comprehend what all perfection entails, but I can easily see that God, as presented in the bible, falls far short of it!

There is no theory under which the conscious and purposeful infliction of needless harm can be classified as "perfect"

God, according to scripture, consciously and purposefully inflicted needless harm
EX: God drowned innocent babies when He didn't have to

 

[Treeplanter]

Yes, you are wrong

Jesus Christ, Himself, begs to differ!

Matthew 22:36-38