This is incontrovertible proof that God is evil. God does not live by his own golden rule.

Take the bible with a grain of salt. It conflicts with itself, but its also solidified by itself.
 
The Universe (not any god(s)) is has no concept of good or evil.

I would contend it would be unwise to even say neutral.

There is no judgement on any action within the range of good/evil that cannot be changed in the future with the benefit of hindsight and reflection.

Therefore good/evil are value judgements and fleeting for the moment.
 
birch said:
What's ironic about your op (which is a good question) is that regardless of a god, either this universe is evil or life and this universe together by its nature produces evil. You dont even have to believe in god to realize the problem of evil.

This is also because god can be defined in so many ways and is also different to each person. To some god is merely love, so if that is god amid the evil or enemy, then god is good etc.

To me, the laws of nature is evil and we have to try and be humane as possible despite this inherent flaw. Its like realizing your parents and rules or way of life or house you grew up in wasnt the best or werent right but you had to deal with it as best as you can.

Its like that saying that says to change what you can and deal with or in some cases accept what you cant change. And so we have to do that under these laws of the universe, nature, god or whatever you call it.
Click to expand...

A bit off topic but we are not far apart except that I do not have a real problem with evil and cannot think of a better system for life than evolution, which is the cause of human to human evil.

Let me go long winded here.

Christians are always trying to absolve God of moral culpability in the fall by whipping out their favorite "free will!", or “ it’s all man’s fault”.

That is "God gave us free will and it was our free willed choices that caused our fall. Hence God is not blameworthy."

But this simply avoids God's culpability as the author of Human Nature. Free will is only the ability to choose. It is not an explanation why anyone would want to choose "A" or "B" (bad or good action). An explanation for why Eve would even have the nature of "being vulnerable to being easily swayed by a serpent" and "desiring to eat a forbidden fruit" must lie in the nature God gave Eve in the first place. Hence God is culpable for deliberately making humans with a nature-inclined-to-fall, and "free will" means nothing as a response to this problem.

If all sin by nature then, the sin nature is dominant. If not, we would have at least some who would not sin. That being the case, for God to punish us for following the instincts and natures he put in us would be quite wrong.
Psalm 51:5 "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me."

Having said the above for the God that I do not believe in, I am a Gnostic Christian naturalist, let me tell you that evil is all human generated. Evil is our responsibility.

Much has been written to explain what I see as a natural part of evolution.

Consider.

First, let us eliminate what some see as evil. Natural disasters. These are unthinking occurrences and are neither good nor evil. There is no intent to do evil even as victims are created.

Evil then is only human to human.

As evolving creatures, all we ever do, and ever can do, is compete or cooperate.

Cooperation we would see as good as there are no victims created. Competition would be seen as evil as it creates a victim. We all are either cooperating, doing good, or competing, doing evil at all times.

Without us doing some of both, we would likely go extinct.

This, to me, explains why there is evil in the world quite well.

Be you a believer in nature, evolution or God, we should all see that what Christians see as something to blame, evil, we should see that what we have, competition, deserves a huge thanks for being available to us.

There is no conflict between nature and God, (not that he exists), on this issue. This is how things are and should be.

We all must do what some will think is evil as we compete and create losers to this competition.

Regards
DL
 
DaveC426913 said:
Not that I'm advocating for god or anything, but this makes some false assumptions:


The Golden Rule applies to humans.

Anyone does not include God.


It seems kind of silly when you play it out:
I am God. I am omnipotent, yet somwhow I must follow a rule. :rolleye:
But hey...
I should do unto humans as I would have humans do unto me?
If I kill a human, can the human kill me? God? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Well, if you want to ignore that God is supposed to return and implement his laws, and that we mostly all think that a law makers is subject to the laws he puts into place, then go ahead.

Would you vote for a judge or God that said he was exempting himself from his own laws and rules?

I would not and think only the foolish would.

Do as I say and not as I do would show just how immoral God would be if he said such a thing.

Regards
DL
 
Sarkus said:
Does God kill? You say it is irrefutable (which suggests that it is also irrefutable that God actually exists, which is surely the subject of another thread?) but on what basis do you assert this?

Further, why is God good or evil? Can't good and evil simply be a conscious subjective perspective of the environment / actions rather than anything inherent?
And why is the golden rule the only yardstick by which you would judge someone good or evil? Do you see no times when going against the golden rule would be seen as non-evil?
Click to expand...

It is not irrefutable that, --- God exists.

I have the one bit of evidence that sinks all other theistic arguments. God is absentee and if a God wanted to be relevant to man he would not be.

I cannot think of any scenario where the golden rule would not be the best rule to apply.

Perhaps your imagination can do better.

I do agree that most moral tenets are subjective though. In fact, the only tenet I can think of that is perhaps objective is that the good of the many outweigh the good of the few. Even that might be subject to a subjective judgement though.

You began with asking if God killed. The thread was written with Christians and the bible in mind.

Just flip through the bible and you will see that God killing quite a bit. Even his own son, needlessly.

Regards
DL
 
Jan Ardena said:
I think this is the law of the prophets, not God.
However, if it has to be a rule, it must be for those of us who need reminding.

jan.
Click to expand...

Indeed.

Like laws that are created to keep honest people honest or to educate the less enlightened.

The thing about your, --- law of the prophets, is that to Christians, Jesus was also God.

I think the Trinity concept to be rather stupid but most Christians are Trinitarians. I think.

Regards
DL
 
billvon said:
No, it's not. The golden rule is "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." How do you know what God (or whatever the image you have of what God is) would want one over the other? Sounds like you are trying to apply human concepts to a non-human entity, which doesn't make much sense.
Click to expand...

You can believe that God has a death wish if you like. I do not think any living sane entity does.

Then again, if any human did as much genocidal murdering that God is said to do, I think any moral man would go insane. Perhaps that is why God is absentee. He is too insane to find his way back to us.

Regards
DL
 
billvon said:
But it does have to be human if you wish to ascribe human wants and desires to it - which is what the Golden Rule is predicated upon.

Would it make sense to ascribe the Golden Rule to a forest, for example? Does the Golden Rule allow you to cut down a tree? Does it allow you to let a forest fire burn thousands of trees? Do such questions even make sense when applied to a non-human entity like a forest? And forests are a lot more like us than any version of God is.
Click to expand...

Perhaps.

I have no problem with doing unto a forest what I would want done to me.

I want to contribute and do my part of sustaining the entire eco system. If I put that as the forests goal as well, then the way I treat the forest should be in a way where I help it to also contribute to the greater eco system, and yes, that would include using wood to cook with because that last bit is what helped early man get off the ground and possibly gave us the edge over our competitors.

Regards
DL
 
Great Old One said:
Jesus is claimed to be both fully human and fully God by the Christians. So, when God tortures and kills more readily than He could easily heal it might seem somewhat hypocritical of Him.

However, He claimed as the most important commandment:

"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind."

Love thy neighbor as self comes second.

In this way, it appears God might escape your indictment on a technicality. He isn't tasked to love you as much as He loves Himself. It's rather your job to love Him first and then love everybody else as much as you love your own self. If God doesn't express His love of you as much as you wanted while you rot and die from cancer in your last days then that really isn't His problem.

God has another escape route here from a charge of hypocrisy.

Maybe He hates Himself.

After all, we are all created in His own image and He kills every last one of us at some point. So when you're treated horribly you can take comfort in knowing it's exactly what God wants to happen. He's treating you just as He wants to be treated Himself. When He made His star appearance here on Earth his favorite thing to do was to become crucified.

He just hates Himself..and you too.

Whether or not you feel like this would be particularly evil in nature is representation-incorporating.
Click to expand...

I can appreciate why God would hate himself if he is the bible God. I would hate myself as well if I were that evil and without morals. As to hating me, he had better because that is almost all he gets or deserves from any moral person.

To the first rule.
I did not bother quoting that first rule because I do not see it as doable.

Can you love someone who you have never met or seen and is not around to make that love a true love with reciprocity, which is a huge component to love?

I think that the first rule is basically exactly what the second rule is, but you have to put it in the context created by the following.

Matthew 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

If you can see the God within you, then you can love both man and God as yourself.

Do you see what I mean?

Regards
DL
 
kx000 said:
Take the bible with a grain of salt. It conflicts with itself, but its also solidified by itself.
Click to expand...

By todays moral compass, the bible is garbage.

What else can be said of a book that has produced and continues to produce a homophobic and misogynous people who are eager to shed their sins onto an innocent scapegoat called Jesus.

As Ingersoll said; 'no man would be fit for heaven who would consent that an innocent person should suffer for his sin.'

Regards
DL
 
Michael 345 said:
The Universe (not any god(s)) is has no concept of good or evil.

I would contend it would be unwise to even say neutral.

There is no judgement on any action within the range of good/evil that cannot be changed in the future with the benefit of hindsight and reflection.

Therefore good/evil are value judgements and fleeting for the moment.
Click to expand...

Good and evil are indeed value judgement but I do not see them as fleeting.

They might be fleeting to those who do not activate their moral sense and cannot say that it is evil to kill when one can just as easily cure.

Your is a nice politically correct way of stating the issue but please remember that we are talking about 1.5 billion Christians who adore a genocidal son murderer. Political correctness goes right over their morally empty heads.

Regards
DL
 
Greatest I am said:
Good and evil are indeed value judgement but I do not see them as fleeting.

They might be fleeting to those who do not activate their moral sense and cannot say that it is evil to kill when one can just as easily cure.

Your is a nice politically correct way of stating the issue but please remember that we are talking about 1.5 billion Christians who adore a genocidal son murderer. Political correctness goes right over their morally empty heads.

Regards
DL
Click to expand...


Point I expressed about

Therefore good/evil are value judgements and fleeting for the moment.

refers more to individual judgements.

If whatever particular judgement is changed with benefit of hindsight that judgement is/was fleeting.

And of course it can change again. No limit on modifications.

Good and evil, as two concepts, yes of course remain as anchor points, at either end of the chain and are not fleeting.

Which link, between the two, is applied to particular actions is the fleeting part.
 
Greatest I am said:
I have no problem with doing unto a forest what I would want done to me.
Click to expand...
So you'd be OK if someone cut you down for a chair, or intentionally burned you because they figured that was good for your ecosystem?
You can believe that God has a death wish if you like. I do not think any living sane entity does.
Click to expand...
"Living sane entity" may have no relationship to God. He may exhibit no behavior you consider sane, nor exhibit any characteristics of a living being. He may not even be a discrete entity. To make such comparisons you have to first construct an image of what God is in your mind, and any such image is almost guaranteed to be incorrect.

Using such terms is like describing a rock as an "uneducated communist liar." The terms simply don't apply.
 
Greatest I am said:
By todays moral compass, the bible is garbage.

What else can be said of a book that has produced and continues to produce a homophobic and misogynous people who are eager to shed their sins onto an innocent scapegoat called Jesus.

As Ingersoll said; 'no man would be fit for heaven who would consent that an innocent person should suffer for his sin.'

Regards
DL
Click to expand...

Take it with a grain of salt. You can be Islamic, Jesus doesn't die in the Quran.
 
DaveC426913 said:
Uh Hello!!!!! Spoiler alert please!

Rude...
Click to expand...


Golden rule as I understand is "the biblical rule of ‘do as you would be done by’ (Matt. 7:12).

Really? The rule is said to be golden? I presume this is because everyone spouting this rule has a mind set where they live in a world where everyone is nice.

Problem alert.

All very well if the person doing the doing is all lovey dovey.

Personally I would not want a sadistic masochist within 500 klms of me.
 
It seems kind of silly when you play it out:
I am God. I am omnipotent, yet somwhow I must follow a rule.

Here's a thought bubble (certainly not original from me).

An omnipotent god can do ANYTHING right?

An agnostic who despite being agnostic got into heaven (he had been just so good).

During the obligatory audience with god he was asked if god could do anything for such an agnostic.

Now even though he had gotten into heaven a certain mischievous streak remained.

The reply came thus:-

Yes. Being the newest agnostic here I am wondering why those here don't have a meeting place.

Soooo
  • I would like a meeting place that is the (and always remains) the biggest in heaven
  • So big not even you can jump over, go around, go through or tunnel under
  • Nor can you be able to lift it off its foundation or, once it is in place, weaken it in any way
  • Strengthen YES weaken NO and
  • The top 10 floors are solely for my use.
You cannot enter our meeting place except by direct invitation from a member and my 10 floors extra exclusive invitation from me.

Remember all this applies not because YOU don't want to (placing self imposed restrictions on yourself).

You literally CAN'T.

Does he get his meeting place?​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top