For the Love of God.... (2 Viewers)

[Karlmarx]

What does everyone think about the supposed 'Love of God'?

Personally, this is what i think of;

1. God, is omnibenevolent
2. He can only do good things
3. He is Omnipotent as well
4. His power is limitless
5. Joshua is allowed to commit Genocide in the name of God
6. Therefore, Joshua is 'loved' by God for doing his bidding
7. What is defined then, as doing things that God 'Loves' outside of the prayer/worship?
8. Why does God need to be loved if he is Omnipotent?
9. Is it okay then if i go out and murder people who don't believe in God, as Joshua did, because, clearly that pleases God?
10. If not, because I'm not a creationist retard, where does that leave the 'Love' of God?


Or should I just go worship the to seemingly piss God off. I hope my School Pastor doesn't summon him down and get me smited!


Oh wait..

 

[Pink Balloons]

another does god exist thread?

 

[Scorch]

another does god exist thread?

Not really; more of a "If God exists, he's a fucking bastard of a creator by whom we all ought to be disgusted".

 

[Karlmarx]

not really; more of a "if god exists, he's a fucking bastard of a creator by whom we all ought to be disgusted".

+1

 

[mirakon]

Please provide me one quote from the Bible that actually states God has to be omnibenevolent

 

[Scorch]

Please provide me one quote from the Bible that actually states God has to be omnibenevolent

That's actually the entire point. Christians insist on claiming that their God is loving and kind when their own Bible disagrees.

 

[Lentern]

That's actually the entire point. Christians insist on claiming that their God is loving and kind when their own Bible disagrees.

Oh dear, more "Christians will believe what I damn well tell them they believe or they as far as I'm concerned they aren't Christian."

 

[Karlmarx]

- The acknowledgement of God's omnibenevolence is an essential foundation in traditional Christianity, and can be seen in Scriptures such as Psalms 18:30, "As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the Lord is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him," and Ps.19:7, "The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple."


And, -

Kill Men, Women, and Children
"Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, "Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children. But do not touch anyone with the mark. Begin your task right here at the Temple." So they began by killing the seventy leaders. "Defile the Temple!" the LORD commanded. "Fill its courtyards with the bodies of those you kill! Go!" So they went throughout the city and did as they were told." (Ezekiel 9:5-7 NLT)

So......


Where is the 'love' of God?

 

[Scorch]

Oh dear, more "Christians will believe what I damn well tell them they believe or they as far as I'm concerned they aren't Christian."

Oh dear, why didn't you reply to my other post on the subject?

No, I am claiming that Christianity's conception of God entirely ignores his acts and nature as depicted in their own Bible. A loving God does not order that his people murder, slaughter and destroy entire civilizations, or that women who are raped should be stoned, or that women should stay quiet in the presence of men, nor does he require any brutal scapegoat of human sacrifice in order to simply help his own creations.

What this leads is to the hypocrisy whereby the only way Christianity is able to appear somewhat modern and less barbaric, is by rationalizing the necessity of ignoring large chunks of its own Holy Book in order to continue peddling their image of a loving and kind God.

It quite frankly doesn't matter whether or not I believe in God because I am pointing out the necessary hypocrisy of your religion, and by extension pointing out the flawed, barbaric nature of the Bible upon which it is based. Whether or not I believe in God is irrelevant.​

You are missing the forest for the trees here, and are clearly in way over your head.

 

[Lentern]

Oh dear, why didn't you reply to my other post on the subject?

No, I am claiming that Christianity's conception of God entirely ignores his acts and nature as depicted in their own Bible. A loving God does not order that his people murder, slaughter and destroy entire civilizations, or that women who are raped should be stoned, or that women should stay quiet in the presence of men, nor does he require any brutal scapegoat of human sacrifice in order to simply help his own creations.

What this leads is to the hypocrisy whereby the only way Christianity is able to appear somewhat modern and less barbaric, is by rationalizing the necessity of ignoring large chunks of its own Holy Book in order to continue peddling their image of a loving and kind God.

It quite frankly doesn't matter whether or not I believe in God because I am pointing out the necessary hypocrisy of your religion, and by extension pointing out the flawed, barbaric nature of the Bible upon which it is based. Whether or not I believe in God is irrelevant.​

You are missing the forest for the trees here, and are clearly in way over your head.

I didn't reply because you had made no new points, providing no further explanation or any real explanation for your, um, dogma.

 

[Scorch]

I didn't reply because you had made no new points, providing no further explanation or any real explanation for your, um, dogma.

You quite frankly do not understand what I am saying, at this point. I am not telling anyone what to believe, but rather not to paint certain beliefs in a false light. If you wish to ignore the Bible, then all power to you, for I believe it to be barbaric, however you cannot claim the divine nature of the Bible and then ignore parts of it and not expect to be ridiculed and called out for your hypocrisy.

Consequently, if you wish to believe that God is loving, kind and forgiving, then you may delude yourself to your hearts content; however if you then make a claim that the Bible supports such a view, then I would have to disagree. You are so unequipped to deal with such an idea that you resort to idiotic attacks on my right to comment, logical fallacy (poisoning the well, begging the question, etc.) and misrepresent my view with childish quips about 'telling people what to believe' instead of engaging in conversation.

I am done with this, you've stopped being amusing.

 

[Lentern]

You quite frankly do not understand what I am saying, at this point. I am not telling anyone what to believe, but rather not to paint certain beliefs in a false light. If you wish to ignore the Bible, then all power to you, for I believe it to be barbaric, however you cannot claim the divine nature of the Bible and then ignore parts of it and not expect to be ridiculed and called out for your hypocrisy.

Consequently, if you wish to believe that God is loving, kind and forgiving, then you may delude yourself to your hearts content; however if you then make a claim that the Bible supports such a view, then I would have to disagree. You are so unequipped to deal with such an idea that you resort to idiotic attacks on my right to comment, logical fallacy (poisoning the well, begging the question, etc.) and misrepresent my view with childish quips about 'telling people what to believe' instead of engaging in conversation.

I am done with this, you've stopped being amusing.

Until you come to realise there is a difference between Christianity and Biblical Fundamentalism there is no good reason to offer you anything more than quips and jibes.

 

[Scorch]

Until you come to realise there is a difference between Christianity and Biblical Fundamentalism there is no good reason to offer you anything more than quips and jibes.

Yes, there is a difference; the willingness to ignore large chunks (possibly half) of the Bible. The fact that you label anything short of simply ignoring parts of the Bible as fundamentalism shows just how much you don't understand what I'm saying.

Or do you not believe the Old Testament to be a factual account?

 

[tommykins]

YouTube - Richard Dawkins Interviews Creationist Wendy Wright (Part 1/7)

If anyone can past 4/7, I commend you.

I lost a few brain cells watching this.

 

[Scorch]

I couldn't. I stopped at 3.

 

[tommykins]

I couldn't. I stopped at 3.

6 and 7 were the funniest.

She goes on about ad hominems and random logical fallacies yet creates strawmen left right and centre.

Also, when presented (well, not presented as it's impossible where they are but more so informed) of evidence, completely dodges it and goes on to say about social implications or even herself starts ad hominems by saying 'IS IT REALLY THAT IMPORTANT THAT I BELIEVE WHAT YOU BELIEVE?'

I weep for mankind.

 

[mirakon]

- The acknowledgement of God's omnibenevolence is an essential foundation in traditional Christianity, and can be seen in Scriptures such as Psalms 18:30, "As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the Lord is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him," and Ps.19:7, "The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple."



So......


Where is the 'love' of God?

These quotes simply state God is perfect. The concept of omnibenevolence being integral to perfection is debatable.

 

[Scorch]

These quotes simply state God is perfect. The concept of omnibenevolence being integral to perfection is debatable.

Well yes, however Christianity has a vested interest in claiming that God is all-loving. To acknowledge otherwise would admit that, in the reality of the Bible's portrayal, God is omnipotent, omniscient and extremely capricious, at times. He loves selectively, forgives selectively, and even the New Testament theology flies in the face of the accounts of the Old Testament regarding his nature and actions.

So to pretend that all-loving is a lesser evil than to admit that God is a violent tyrant.

 

[Karlmarx]

Bullets = This Woman. I watched the whole thing, and now, i hav

 

[beatboxre]

So to pretend that all-loving is a lesser evil than to admit that God is a violent tyrant.

Explain your Richard Dawkins quote please (In the sig)

Understanding the world?