Animals Doing What Animals Do...

[seer]

I became Christian as an adult and remained in the faith for 20 years, so I'm pretty familiar with Jesus. I no longer believe he deserves the exalted reputation he has.

You know Enjolras, I'm really sorry to hear that. That you may finally miss the joys of a New Heavens and Earth where absolute peace and true brotherhood will reign. That you may not realize the very things you so long for, so deeply crave.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8LztTF5F80

[The Pixie]

You know Enjolras, most atheists I know are openly ethical relativists. So it is refreshing to run across moral realists like you and Pixie - as irrational as your view is. But it's sad that you don't realize that the universal moral truths, the love, grace, tenderness and goodness that you so ardently seek - that you intuitively know - are found in the teachings and person of Christ Jesus. The Son of God...

I fully accept that they are in the teachings of Jesus. It is the "Christ Jesus. The Son of God" bit that I see no good reason to accept.

[The Pixie]

You're right. It is. But that isn't God's fault. It's yours and mine.

Why? This looks again like you have divided everything into two parts. If it is good, then God necessaily did it, if it is bad, mankind necessarily did it.

I see no reason to suppose either must be true.

And what would you have God do? Make us all robots? Is that really what you want? No free will for no suffering? Where's the love in that?

Is there free will in heaven?

If there is, then clearly God could contrive this world to be a paradise and still people have free will.

If not, then are you happy to spend en eternity as a robot? Is that really what you want?

Why would he mistrust His creator who had hitherto only provided for Him and had given Him a wife? The way I see it, it makes the most sense if Satan convinced them to take the fruit out of sheer curiosity even though God told them not to. It was an irrational act.

What has satan got to do with it? The bible account says a snake. All snakes were cursed to crawl on their bellies because of what one snake did. Do you think all snakes are cursed because of what a fallen angel did?

Wait, I bet it was mankind's fault that God cursed snakes for the actions of a fallen angel. Yes, I am mocking you.

Also, why would he distrust the snake? The snake seemingly told the truth, at least from its perspective. Further, Adam and Eve had probably never encountered a lie before, and certainly could not tell right from wrong, so even if the snake was lying, why would they even suspect that?

I'm sure I could find similar language used in the Rabbis, but the New Testament consistently speaks of us being "dead in our sins" and of reprobates being, "dead while they live." I don't see how that's any less reasonable than a modern expression like, "I'm dead on my feet" or "she's so dumb, she's dead from the neck up."

All you have to do now is prove that that is what the original author of Genesis meant. I see no reason to suppose that that is the case, besides a desire to make it appear that God was telling the truth.

He gave us free will so that we could truly love Him and one and one another. Love is meaningless if you have no choice but to love. He's not just getting angry because we disobey Him, it's because He knows that we're only hurting one another when we let sin separate us from our source of life and peace.

Yes, let us be quite clear here. God gave us free will to inflate his ego. He wants us to freely love him, and why should he give a hoot about the collateral damage?

All of which we could have been immune to...

But God chose otherwise.

Ok. I guess seer and I have a different view of that.

Yeah, I got you two had similar ideas.

I don't believe that it could have been otherwise. The wages of sin is death.

So you believe it was beyond God's power to create a world where people are just forgiven for their sins without anyone dying?

But God can contrive it so that if someone else dies, then that is good enough?

A sin, as I understand it, is a transgression against God. If God says that working on the sabbath is a sin, and you then work on the sabbath, then someone or something has to die - God is powerless to prevent that. Is that your position?

Yes, but God also wanted to create a world in which we had things like mountains, jungles, and the deep sea to marvel and at and see His glory in. Would that have been possible without there also being the possibility of illness, poison, and natural disasters? I don't believe these things are going to go away. Our relationship to them is just going to change.

God wants us to see his glory, and why would he give a hoot about the collateral damage. Seeing a pattern here.

If your complaint is that God should have done it sooner, then I'll ask what you're doing to convert the world.

God should have done it on day one. That is my point. He chose to set up heaven as a paradise and earth as what we see around us. He could have made both a paradise, he chose not.

Why am I not trying to convert people? Because inconsistencies like this convince me that it is not true.

I'm a universalist. Like Heaven, Hell is a state of rejection of God, of hatred of His love. Babies are incapable of this but it doesn't mean they don't feel the consequences of the fallen state we all born into. So, I see no reason to think that a baby that dies will suffer after death.

I reject God because I do not think he exists. If when I die, it turns out he does, can I just accept him?

The standard answer is no, but what you say here suggests I can. All I have to do is repent - which I will want to do at that point - and then I am fine. As long as I do not reject God, I will not be in hell, and can go to heaven. That is correct, isn't?

Shame in our disobedience, yes. There's nothing shameful about the world God made in itself.

The shame is in Christianity's message to mankind. We are all born in shame. You just said "the fallen state we all born into".

I strongly disagree and as the naysayer the onus is on you to show how it could have been done. Remember, God cannot create a square circle.

He could have planted the Tree of Knowledge on Mars. Then Adam and Eve would not have eaten it, and we would not all be born into a fallen state.

Or is planting a tree on Mars beyond God?

Because they're human. Because we've screwed up our entire race.

Go on. Exactly how did we screw up the race so that babies are born into a fallen state?

I didn't say it was solely due to God. God creates the mind of man and God can control what obstacles and circumstances might get in its way of his thought process or not. How many eureka moments have happened in the history of science like Archimedes seizing on the principle of displacement or Friedrich August Keukule's dream about the circular nature of the Benzene molecule?

So he can do that, but he cannot stop us sinning. It is free will applied when useful, and ignored otherwise.

Furthermore, God is the one who gave scientists life and intelligence in the first place. It's no different than saying that a scientist would only have made such and such a discovery if his doctor had been there to keep him healthy.

Except no one is sayng the doctor should get the Nobel proze, rather than the scientist.

[seer]

I fully accept that they are in the teachings of Jesus. It is the "Christ Jesus. The Son of God" bit that I see no good reason to accept.

And that is the bottom line isn't Pixie. Christ is the embodiment of God the Father. Which make His teachings universal and inviolate. He is the very thing that your moral intuition is pointing to. And it is more than sad that folks like you and Enjolras may, in the end, miss out on the very thing you so ardently seek, and so deeply yearn for.

[Enjolras]

You know Enjolras, I'm really sorry to hear that. That you may finally miss the joys of a New Heavens and Earth where absolute peace and true brotherhood will reign. That you may not realize the very things you so long for, so deeply crave.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8LztTF5F80

I do appreciate your concern, but I cannot embrace what I no longer believe to be true.

There were many reasons that led me to eventually change my mind, but this issue of morality was one of the big ones. When I read the bible the first time I was taken aback by some of the things God was said to have done. I was told that God was perfect, all-loving, holy, just, merciful, all-powerful, all-knowing and wise beyond measure. But he didn't seem that way in the actual bible I was reading. The God in the bible did seem good at times, but also vindictive and cruel at other times. I figured I just didn't know enough about the culture, language and context to make an accurate judgement, so I put those concerns on the back shelf.

But the doubts about God's goodness kept coming back. How could a good god order the death of children and infants? How could he sanction slavery? Why did he punish people for the misdeeds of others? Learning more about the context did not help me to see how this was all compatible with the notion of divine benevolence and holiness. It led me to think that YHWH was not different in kind than other ancient gods and kings. He was just like them- a creation of ancient peoples. They did their best in trying to understand and explain the world around them, but that's all God was it seemed to me, the best effort of ancient humans.

[seer]

I do appreciate your concern, but I cannot embrace what I no longer believe to be true.

There were many reasons that led me to eventually change my mind, but this issue of morality was one of the big ones. When I read the bible the first time I was taken aback by some of the things God was said to have done. I was told that God was perfect, all-loving, holy, just, merciful, all-powerful, all-knowing and wise beyond measure. But he didn't seem that way in the actual bible I was reading. The God in the bible did seem good at times, but also vindictive and cruel at other times. I figured I just didn't know enough about the culture, language and context to make an accurate judgement, so I put those concerns on the back shelf.

But the doubts about God's goodness kept coming back. How could a good god order the death of children and infants? How could he sanction slavery? Why did he punish people for the misdeeds of others? Learning more about the context did not help me to see how this was all compatible with the notion of divine benevolence and holiness. It led me to think that YHWH was not different in kind than other ancient gods and kings. He was just like them- a creation of ancient peoples. They did their best in trying to understand and explain the world around them, but that's all God was it seemed to me, the best effort of ancient humans.

Listen Enjolras, I think every Christian has read things in Scripture, especially in the Old Testament, that make us scratch our heads. But this is the way I look at. To me the clearest, most complete, Revelation of God is found in the teachings and example of Christ (and the New Testament by extension). And no other person of human history has so captured my soul, or so resonated with my moral sense. Or engendered in me such a sense of tenderness. And I will repeat, as you know, in Christian theology, the dead are not necessarily dead forever. Especially the children - their story is not over. There is life beyond this world. Hope beyond this world. But if you are still open to the Gospel I would suggest two short books by C.S. Lewis: "Reflections on the Psalms" and "The Problem of Pain." They personally helped me work through these issues.

Happy Thanksgiving (well that is if you are an American).

[The Pixie]

And that is the bottom line isn't Pixie. Christ is the embodiment of God the Father. Which make His teachings universal and inviolate. He is the very thing that your moral intuition is pointing to. And it is more than sad that folks like you and Enjolras may, in the end, miss out on the very thing you so ardently seek, and so deeply yearn for.

Or you may have been totally deluding yourself for years, and folks like Enjolras and I are right.

How do we decide which? Is the fact that he taught the Golden Rule sufficient evidence? Given others were teaching it before Jesus, I think not.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule

In fact, if you want to say My religion is right because it got morality right you are on to a loser from the start, given Biblical support for slavery.

[seer]

How do we decide which? Is the fact that he taught the Golden Rule sufficient evidence? Given others were teaching it before Jesus, I think not.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule

Have you missed everything I said? Yes, the golden rule has been around for a while. That is not surprising since we all have "God's law written on our hearts." But again, in your universe the golden rule is ultimately meaningless. A nice thought but there is nothing there to enforce it. No good reason to follow it, if violating it gains you power and wealth. In your world Pixie a Mother Teresa and Stalin come to the same end - so why be a Mother Teresa?

[shunyadragon]

Have you missed everything I said? Yes, the golden rule has been around for a while. That is not surprising since we all have "God's law written on our hearts." But again, in your universe the golden rule is ultimately meaningless. A nice thought but there is nothing there to enforce it. No good reason to follow it, if violating it gains you power and wealth. In your world Pixie a Mother Teresa and Stalin come to the same end - so why be a Mother Teresa?

No we have not missed everything you have said, but you have been ignoring the simple facts of the responses.

This has been explained to you many times seer and you are ignoring it. Short term gains in wealth and power resorting to violence against humanity as groups or individuals have never succeeded in the long term success of the human species. Cooperation, compassion and systems of justice preserving the human family and community are what led to the success of the human species, and Mother Teresa is just one example of this.

[Enjolras]

Listen Enjolras, I think every Christian has read things in Scripture, especially in the Old Testament, that make us scratch our heads. But this is the way I look at. To me the clearest, most complete, Revelation of God is found in the teachings and example of Christ (and the New Testament by extension). And no other person of human history has so captured my soul, or so resonated with my moral sense. Or engendered in me such a sense of tenderness. And I will repeat, as you know, in Christian theology, the dead are not necessarily dead forever. Especially the children - their story is not over. There is life beyond this world. Hope beyond this world. But if you are still open to the Gospel I would suggest two short books by C.S. Lewis: "Reflections on the Psalms" and "The Problem of Pain." They personally helped me work through these issues.

Happy Thanksgiving (well that is if you are an American).

I encourage you to keep scratching. I have never found the move to focus on Christ, as opposed to the rest of the bible, to be very compelling. Jesus himself believed in the god of the OT, so if God is unchanging then the various portrayals of him in the OT are just as much a reflection of his moral character as Jesus was.

Plus, Jesus took the notion of divine retribution to a whole new level. When YHWH killed people, he was done punishing them. Jesus goes far beyond that, past the grave- to torture his opponents eternally in hell. Is that really the epitome of morality? I guess we all have to decide that for ourselves.

Happy Thanksgiving to you as well!

[Kelp(p)]

I'm not sure I can see where the quoted passage is going other than 'Gosh, modern life throws up a lot of complex moral issues'. They're as complex for theists as they are for non-theists. Given the broad range of Christianity, it doesn't seem to me your 'absolute' clear morality is either absolute or clear. You all seem nearly as confused as the rest of us are. Practically then, I find this is pretty useless conversation. We're all going to have our opinions. There are no 'gotcha' arguments despite both sides thinking there are. The theist view is reasonable and internally consistent. I can see that, but for lots of reasons I doubt its premises.

The 'clash of cultures' thing is indeed a complex moral minefield. Before Christianity was dethroned as the default Western view missionaries did a lot of 'good' stuff but they also did a lot of 'bad' stuff. So once again, this black and white morality fails to produce any better results than reasonable people of good will achieve. Is modern world morality complex? Yes indeed. I think it is best faced with a nuanced and flexible approach that can see the complexities and acknowledge them.

(And BTW, your first sentence is in no way supported by the rest of your post as far as I can see. Maybe I'm just dumb.)

I'd say the Quakers have a pretty good track record as far as Christian morality goes. But if you don't want to have this conversation, then we don't have to.

[seer]

No we have not missed everything you have said, but you have been ignoring the simple facts of the responses.

This has been explained to you many times seer and you are ignoring it. Short term gains in wealth and power resorting to violence against humanity as groups or individuals have never succeeded in the long term success of the human species. Cooperation, compassion and systems of justice preserving the human family and community are what led to the success of the human species, and Mother Teresa is just one example of this.

What? What does a Stalin or Mao or a Bond trader care for the long term success of the human species? Why should our species not go extinct like the millions of other species before. Why are we any different?

[seer]

I encourage you to keep scratching. I have never found the move to focus on Christ, as opposed to the rest of the bible, to be very compelling. Jesus himself believed in the god of the OT, so if God is unchanging then the various portrayals of him in the OT are just as much a reflection of his moral character as Jesus was.

Plus, Jesus took the notion of divine retribution to a whole new level. When YHWH killed people, he was done punishing them. Jesus goes far beyond that, past the grave- to torture his opponents eternally in hell. Is that really the epitome of morality? I guess we all have to decide that for ourselves.

Well I'm annihilationist, so I'm not sure about the eternal thing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_conditionalism

But Enjolras, what would you desire of God? I mean think about it. The Creator of the universe is Holy, Pure, All Powerful and full of Glory - yet this God of Glory sets aside His garments, takes a towel and washes our dirty feet! My goodness man, does that not tell you something very profound about His nature? His character?

[Enjolras]

Why are we any different?

Are you seriously asking this same question again? Despite the fact that it has already been answered many times right here, in this thread?

We are different because we have complex nervous systems which allow us to do calculus, to do astrophysics, to write poetry, to fall in love. If you don't accept those things as making humans distinct from all other animals then I don't know what kind of answer could satisfy you.

[Enjolras]

Well I'm annihilationist, so I'm not sure about the eternal thing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_conditionalism

But Enjolras, what would you desire of God? I mean think about it. The Creator of the universe is Holy, Pure, All Powerful and full of Glory - yet this God of Glory sets aside His garments, takes a towel and washes our dirty feet! My goodness man, does that not tell you something very profound about His nature? His character?

I would think a perfect God would always be perfect, not just in cherry-picked, select passages that resonate with our sense of kindness and humility. The same bible also shows God ordering the killing of children and babies.

Let me ask you, is there anything that God could do that you would consider immoral or repugnant?