T
tonyrey
Guest
It is another perception of God as distorted as deism. One is wrathful and the other heartless!
Jesus rejected both when He quoted Hosea: “For I desire mercy, not sacrifice”.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Jesus rejected both when He quoted Hosea: “For I desire mercy, not sacrifice”.
T
tonyrey
Guest
And without hope!No, I rather suspect that most won’t and since I don’t believe that the god described in the bible is the creator, I do so without fear of retribution.
You’re on the right track but treating us as adults does not imply indifference!My God is truly a creator and not a micromanager who creates to destroy.
He allows his creation true freedom to find their way. Many here find that to be impersonal and uncaring. Maybe, maybe not. Maybe it is that the God of Deism treats us as the adults that we are and leaves us to raise the young as best we can.
O
oldcelt
Guest
Without hope of what? That a human version of daddy in the sky will make it all better? I sure don’t see any evidence of that god in human history. Instead, I see a missing element in creation sometimes called the first cause…the one who gave creation a kick start.And without hope!
You’re on the right track but treating us as adults does not imply indifference!
What do Christians believe God the Father was up to during the New Testament? He sure wasn’t limiting suffering.
O
oldcelt
Guest
It is another perception of God as distorted as deism. One is wrathful and the other heartless!
Jesus rejected both when He quoted Hosea: “For I desire mercy, not sacrifice”.
Your words Tony, two different Gods, which is what the bible shows IMO. However, the Church views that as heresy. The creator of Deism has permitted creation to follow its own course…that is far preferable to destroying or ordering the destruction of entire civilizations or creating with foreknowledge of an individual’s ultimate condemnation.By Yahweh, the national god of the Iron Age kingdoms of Israel and Judah, not the Christian God! There is a vast difference which misrepresents the teaching of Jesus…
O
oldcelt
Guest
Having witnessed all those things you mention, nice appeal to emotion with the newborn, and having spent almost 50 years as a Catholic, I came to the conclusion that the God of Christianity does not exist, but that God does. The rest of your hell threats are stale and the real purpose of most organized religion…fear and control.Really? You have never seen a Parent sacrifice for their Child.
You never saw a neighbor helping a neighbor.
You never had the Love of a Parent, child, cousin, uncle, aunt.
You never seen a Child brought into this world? Seen the innocence of a Child and complete trust it has in other humans.
Sad, only a few evidences of God!
And you never heard of the Love of God who came down from heaven, was crucified, buried and rose on the 3rd day for the forgiveness of your sins and mine.
Sad just so sad, that you have never seen Love.
By the way as far as the story of Moses. The reason was t fulfill the Prophecy of Exodus 4:23.
God is patient and gave many warnings, and although every time he promised to do as asked, he refused to keep his word 9 times.
It is a lesson. People think I can refuse God, do what I want, and if he does exist he will not deny me, but I can deny him all I want.
If he is this merciful God they claim, he will not send me to hell, if there is a hell.
It does not work that way. God said if you deny me, I will deny you…
Its a choice people, if you want God you will want him now in this world. If you deny him here you will deny him in the next also.
As Jesus told the Jews that rejected him, you are not of me. if you were of me you would listen to me and what I say. My Father is not your Father or you would hear and obey my words.
If the God the Father in heaven is your Father, you will obey him, and follow the Son of God and do as he has taught.
If not, you don’t want him and as God said, you have free will to do so. But unless you come through the Son you will not enter into heaven with the Father.
T
tonyrey
Guest
Your words Tony, two different Gods, which is what the bible shows IMO. However, the Church views that as heresy.*It is another perception of God as distorted as deism. One is wrathful and the other heartless!
Jesus rejected both when He quoted Hosea: “For I desire mercy, not sacrifice”.*
Quote:
By Yahweh, the national god of the Iron Age kingdoms of Israel and Judah, not the Christian God! There is a vast difference which misrepresents the teaching of Jesus…
The creator of Deism has permitted creation to follow its own course…that is far preferable to destroying or ordering the destruction of entire civilizations or creating with foreknowledge of an individual’s ultimate condemnation.
It is heresy to believe God is not a loving Father who cares for all His children. Jesus was regarded as a heretic, not only because He claimed to be the Son of God but also for having condemned the Pharisees and scribes for their hypocrisy, legalism and exploitation of the poor. He certainly didn’t proclaim that the Father had destroyed or ordered the indiscriminate destruction of entire civilizations consisting of innocent men, women and children:
Matthew 10:29-31
T
tonyrey
Guest
It is heresy to believe God is not a loving Father who cares for all His children. Jesus was regarded as a heretic, not only because He claimed to be the Son of God but also for having condemned the Pharisees and scribes for their hypocrisy, legalism and exploitation of the poor. He certainly didn’t proclaim that the Father had destroyed or ordered the indiscriminate destruction of entire civilizations consisting of innocent men, women and children:Your words Tony, two different Gods, which is what the bible shows IMO. However, the Church views that as heresy.
The creator of Deism has permitted creation to follow its own course…that is far preferable to destroying or ordering the destruction of entire civilizations or creating with foreknowledge of an individual’s ultimate condemnation.
Consult Matthew 10:29-31
T
tonyrey
Guest
Correction:
The accusation of divine filicide on a colossal scale is based on the failure to distinguish ultimate responsibility and direct responsibility. The value of life greatly exceeds its drawbacks.
It is heresy to believe God is not a loving Father who cares for all His children. Jesus was regarded as a heretic, not only because He claimed to be the Son of God but also for having condemned the Pharisees and scribes for their hypocrisy, legalism and exploitation of the poor. He certainly didn’t proclaim that the Father had destroyed - or ordered - the indiscriminate destruction of entire civilizations consisting of innocent men, women and children:Your words Tony, two different Gods, which is what the bible shows IMO. However, the Church views that as heresy. The creator of Deism has permitted creation to follow its own course…that is far preferable to destroying or ordering the destruction of entire civilizations or creating with foreknowledge of an individual’s ultimate condemnation.
Matthew 10:29-31Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground outside your Father’s care. And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. So don’t be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.
The accusation of divine filicide on a colossal scale is based on the failure to distinguish ultimate responsibility and direct responsibility. The value of life greatly exceeds its drawbacks.
T
tonyrey
Guest
An indifferent monster in the sky certainly makes it far worse! I see no evidence whatsoever for such an absurd hypothesis. A “kick start” implies **knowledge **of the consequences…Without hope of what? That a human version of daddy in the sky will make it all better? I sure don’t see any evidence of that god in human history. Instead, I see a missing element in creation sometimes called the first cause…the one who gave creation a kick start.
On the contrary, He was demonstrating the reality of love and compassion. Jesus wasn’t wasting His time and energy bewailing suffering and doing nothing. Instead of being a negative harbinger of doom and despair He showed us how to live, reduce the misery in the world and give us hope. He was a source of inspiration to countless millions of people who have cared for others rather than withdraw into a morbid state of gloom, despair and pessimism…What do Christians believe God the Father was up to during the New Testament? He sure wasn’t limiting suffering.
A
Amandil
Guest
So is it your contention that suffering is neither instructive nor beneficial?What do Christians believe God the Father was up to during the New Testament? He sure wasn’t limiting suffering.
B
Bradski
Guest
Or retributive?
A
Amandil
Guest
Habitual sinners often think that those forms of love which rob them of their favorite sins are retributive. Like a Father pouring his alcoholic son’s liquor down the drain.
The Father wants to free his son, where the son wants to lock himself away in his own prison with his favorite idol.
People who know that they are sinners before God also know that they can trust in HIs mercy, they’ve experienced it first hand; what they thought would be a closed fist they were surprised to find an open hand.
Psychological projection is hardly a rational argument. Those who admit to thinking that “God is out to get them” implicitly grant that they have done something to be “gotten” and that they refuse to repent of.
The Father wants to free his son, where the son wants to lock himself away in his own prison with his favorite idol.
People who know that they are sinners before God also know that they can trust in HIs mercy, they’ve experienced it first hand; what they thought would be a closed fist they were surprised to find an open hand.
Psychological projection is hardly a rational argument. Those who admit to thinking that “God is out to get them” implicitly grant that they have done something to be “gotten” and that they refuse to repent of.
O
oldcelt
Guest
On a human level, absolutely. Inflicted by a deity, absolutely notSo is it your contention that suffering is neither instructive nor beneficial?
O
oldcelt
Guest
The bid daddy in the sky…who seems to be absent most of the time.Habitual sinners often think that those forms of love which rob them of their favorite sins are retributive. Like a Father pouring his alcoholic son’s liquor down the drain.
The Father wants to free his son, where the son wants to lock himself away in his own prison with his favorite idol.
People who know that they are sinners before God also know that they can trust in HIs mercy, they’ve experienced it first hand; what they thought would be a closed fist they were surprised to find an open hand.
Psychological projection is hardly a rational argument. Those who admit to thinking that “God is out to get them” implicitly grant that they have done something to be “gotten” and that they refuse to repent of.
B
Bradski
Guest
I was thinking of the first born. When God killed them it wasn’t instructive or beneficial. It was, according to you, retribution.Habitual sinners often think that those forms of love which rob them of their favorite sins are retributive.
A
Amandil
Guest
So explain to me from you deistic worldview how precisely pain and suffering “on a human level” is beneficial?On a human level, absolutely. Inflicted by a deity, absolutely not
A
Amandil
Guest
I said that it was much more than merely “retribution”. As usual you read into things what you will and ignore what’s inconvenient.I was thinking of the first born. When God killed them it wasn’t instructive or beneficial. It was, according to you, retribution.
A
Amandil
Guest
He’s as far or as near as you’ll allow Him. You want Him “in the sky”, that’s where He’ll remain.The bid daddy in the sky…who seems to be absent most of the time.
You want Him “absent”, He’ll be “absent”.
You want Him near, He’ll be near.
It’s rather ridiculous to be upset with God because He gives you precisely what you want.
B
Bradski
Guest
More than retribution you say. So at least we have it on good authority that retribution was one of the causes.I said that it was much more than merely “retribution”. As usual you read into things what you will and ignore what’s inconvenient.
The other was, if I remember correctly, that the Pharaoh was the head honcho so all his subjects were deemed guilty by association. Including children. Again, if that’s your definition of justice, or more accurately, what you think is God’s definition, then the God in whom you believe deserves no respect.
Oh, and there was one other. Better kill them before they end up like their fathers. You know, I’ve heard that argument before. It still chills the soul…
A
Amandil
Guest
As I said, you read into things whatever you please.More than retribution you say. So at least we have it on good authority that retribution was one of the causes.
The other was, if I remember correctly, that the Pharaoh was the head honcho so all his subjects were deemed guilty by association. Including children. Again, if that’s your definition of justice, or more accurately, what you think is God’s definition, then the God in whom you believe deserves no respect.
Oh, and there was one other. Better kill them before they end up like their fathers. You know, I’ve heard that argument before. It still chills the soul…
I don’t know why I expect so much from a professed atheist. More fool me.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.