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

[Greatest I am]

I doubt if we can believe the words of Jesus reached us without being corrupted.
His words were passed from one person to another as best that I can tell over at least one generation.
The volume and complexity of his words as recorded are such that to say they were passed on without alteration, misquoting or misunderstood would be folly.
How anyone can believe they quote what Jesus said ignores the reality that many years passed before any of the words of Jesus were written down. Add to that the various translations that came after how can anyone quote words and attribute to them the authority of Jesus.
In particular the words quoted hardly seem to fit other teachings attributed to Jesus.
I could accept generalizations attributed to Jesus but to claim he said this or that ignores the fact that there is no way what he said could be passed on over many years and be correct.
This may not sit well with Christians but there is no way they can say any quotes they offer are indeed the words of Jesus.
Think of this...
I don't know my grand father who as a young man supposedly said many great things, his words were told by one family member to another, and now some 60 years later I decide to write down the words I have been told my grandfather spoke, so many they make up a small book.
Could anyone actually believe I have the actual words my grandfather spoke?
Alex

We Gnostic Christians see Jesus as an archetypal good man myth.

You are correct that anything written in scriptures are either lies or myths that should not be read literally.

A literal miracle working Jesus as described in the scriptures never existed as far as I am concerned.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

What does any of this have to do with God? You're talking about scriptures.

Is it possible that a more accurate subject line ight be "the scriptures are hypocritical and self-contradictory about God"?

Everyone who can read and think for themselves already know this.

I prefer to show how immoral that God is by analysing what believers believe are true words from their holy book.

If you think your idea worthy, start an O.P. on it.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Trouble reading inflection here. Is this:

Jesus! kx is a pacifist. How droll.

or

kx is describing Jesus as a pacifist. How droll.

So wright more clearly.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

I think I understand what you mean.

However, I am missing the part where God stopped being Evil and something to be loathed when correctly understood.

Did that happen?

Would you love God as extreme climate change ruins the Earth with a red giant sun?

Will you greet the Devil with open arms?

After all...it's you who destroys all of the good things of which you're capable of knowing?

You have to differentiate between the mythical God and the only God you can know. Yourself.

The mythical God of war is stuck in his ways.

We are not if we choose not to be.

Gnostic Christian Jesus said, "If those who attract you say, 'See, the Kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you.
If they say to you, 'It is under the earth,' then the fish of the sea will precede you.
Rather, the Kingdom of God is inside of you, and it is outside of you.
[Those who] become acquainted with [themselves] will find it; [and when you] become acquainted with yourselves, [you will understand that] it is you who are the sons of the living Father.
But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."

As to the world. Fear not. It knows how to look after itself even if man goes extinct.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Still not sure why so many people seem to think God is our personal servant, whose primary purpose is to wave clouds away from the sun, save fluffy bunnies and generally make our lives paradiscal.

If God is not our servant, then he is our master the way most theists think he is.

Do you recognize a God? Are you God's servant or God's master?

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Yet here we are, judging (what is ostensibly) the creator of the universe by mortal measures.

???

1 Thessalonians 5:21 Test all things; hold fast what is good.

What, if not mortal measure, is the bible asking us to use to test ideas?

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

but I do believe the God construct is more internally consistent than atheists often acknowledge. What I challenge is not truth or falsehood, but badly-formed arguments, either way.)

Yet before Christians and Muslims became idol worshipers, the intelligent ancients were closer to atheists than theists.

http://bigthink.com/videos/what-is-god-2-2

The badly formed arguments, when they bother giving one at all, comes from theists who hide good arguments behind a supernatural shield which kills any of the goodness within it.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

god is evil because he was political .

I'm assuming we are talking of the monotheism god?

So then he controlled the Earth , wanted to wipe out Humanity through floods . ancient tablets .

I agree, yet Christians love God all the more for his genocidal ways.

So much for love your enemy.

Regards
DL

 

[DaveC426913]

???

1 Thessalonians 5:21 Test all things; hold fast what is good.

What, if not mortal measure, is the bible asking us to use to test ideas?

Regards
DL

Well, the Bible, inasmuch as I give it credence, is not telling us to use stuff to test anything; it is supposedly literally God's wishes, in written form.
So, if it says I turned her to a pillar of salt, then that's God saying 'I get to do that. Follow my laws.'

 

[kx000]

We Gnostic Christians see Jesus as an archetypal good man myth.

You are correct that anything written in scriptures are either lies or myths that should not be read literally.

A literal miracle working Jesus as described in the scriptures never existed as far as I am concerned.

Regards
DL

I can show you a miracle, if your not a human being. Have you ever seen a tree glow.
My nature is omnipresent. I am learning the will of power, the power of free will which is capability. When the tree glows your seeing an aura or essence of a nominalistic nature like time, hope, or science, and the tree glows.

 

[Seattle]

I can show you a miracle, if your not a human being. Have you ever seen a tree glow.
My nature is omnipresent. I am learning the will of power, the power of free will which is capability. When the tree glows your seeing an aura or essence of a nominalistic nature like time, hope, or science, and the tree glows.

What is your native language?

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

I can show you a miracle, if your not a human being. Have you ever seen a tree glow.
My nature is omnipresent. I am learning the will of power, the power of free will which is capability. When the tree glows your seeing an aura or essence of a nominalistic nature like time, hope, or science, and the tree glows.

Deepity???
I have seen many a glowing tree.
During the bush fires at night many are glowing.
Did not notice any of the other stuff you mention however.
Alex

 

[wellwisher]

???

1 Thessalonians 5:21 Test all things; hold fast what is good.

What, if not mortal measure, is the bible asking us to use to test ideas?

Regards
DL

You begin with basic principles and test the validity of things based on those principles. As an analogy, say you went to a magic show and the magician is levitating his lovely assistant. A basic science principle would be to assume gravity is in affect on the stage. If you stick to the basics, this is an illusion this going against this basic principle. Therefore you try to unravel the mystery, based on firm footing of what you know to be real and true. You can't just believe and buy into things, just because your eyes appear to see. Once the herd accepts illusions, things like prestige and peer pressure can make it harder find the truth; Emperors new clothes.

One atheists magic trick, this topic brings up, is blaming evil on God. In tradition, Satan was in charge of the earth. The evil attributed to God, metered out on humans, actually comes from Satan. Satan is the original rebel against God.

2 Corinthians 4:4 New Living Translation (NLT)
4 Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who don’t believe. They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News. They don’t understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God.

In this passage the herd sees the lovely assistant levitating and begins to believe anti-gravity is occurring on stage since they all see this with their own eyes. They don't know enough to go back to basic principles like 2 Corinthians 4:4.

In the Old Testament book of Job, Satan is God's left hand man; chief of staff. He has God's ear and gets God to inflict all types of bad things onto Job, as a test of his faith.

Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.

7And the LORD said unto Satan, From where come you? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it.

8And the LORD said unto Satan, Have you considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a blameless and an upright man, one that fears God, and turns away from evil?

9Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Does Job fear God for nothing?

10Have not you made a hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he has on every side? you have blessed the work of his hands, and his possessions are increased in the land.

11But put forth your hand now, and touch all that he has, and he will curse you to your face.

12And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he has is in your power; only upon himself put not forth your hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

12And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he has is in your power; only upon himself put not forth your hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD.

So who did you say witnessed this such that they could write down what the Lord said to Satan or is this just more made up stuff.
Talk about working out the element of a trick and you fall for made up stuff without question...
Alex

 

[Great Old One]

An odd definition of evil.

I'm an odd person but I suspect more likely is that you're about to try to burn a strawman.

Essentially what you're saying is analogous to:

I am poor. You loan me money. I buy food to survive. Though I was able to have a full belly for a day, ultimately you will get your money back. And for that, I get to call you evil.
Despite the fact that, for a day, my belly was full.

No, it isn't. However, trying to figure out why you think it is would be a complete waste of time so I think we should just let that go and move on.

Compare to:

We don't exist. God gives us existence. We create a world for ourselves. Though we are able to exist millions or billions of years, ultimately it will come to an end. And for that, you get to call God evil. Despite the fact that we existed, flourished and ruled our corner of the universe for billions of years.

It sounds like the only way you think God could be not seen as evil is to never have created life at all.

I've already stated I believe that I don't think there is a defensible version of a good God. Nobody has offered one. That's why there are such a things as formulations of inductive arguments of evil. It looks like God is probably evil.

God, as a ground for being, is metaphysically necessary and unfortunately for us all that nature is also apparently evil. I understand that many people would like to see a divorce between a conception of "evil" and the human condition itself but while that might allow God to be defined in some sense which was not evil it would also mean that good and evil are not relevant to mankind...and thus the nature of God would be not relevant to mankind.

I'm curious. Your mom gave you life, knowing it would lead to your death. Is she evil too? Perhaps she should have done you a kindness and never conceived you?

This seems like an unhelpful attempt to branch into meta-discussion whereby you seek to insult myself or my mother...or else branch into an off-topic discussion regarding free-will.

I decline your kind offer to indulge your curiosity with a substantial answer beyond noting that it's not relevant to the discussion as free-will cannot save a fairly applied moral evaluation against God.

If you suspect otherwise in regards to free-will then it would be up to you to establish.

 

[billvon]

I can show you a miracle, if your not a human being. Have you ever seen a tree glow.

I have seen trees glow but I'm also a human being, so I'm not sure if this applies to me. (It was not due to any miracles, though.)

When the tree glows your seeing an aura or essence of a nominalistic nature like time, hope, or science, and the tree glows.

Or are seeing a fire, or a string of lights, or a lot of fireflies who have decided to land there.

 

[C C]

This is incontrovertible proof that God is evil. God does not live by his own golden rule. God kills when he could just as easily cure. This is irrefutable. is a clear violation of the golden rule. The golden rule as articulated by Jesus. God then is clearly evil. Do you agree with Jesus that anyone who breaks the golden rule is evil?

As the cosmogenic principle concerned with spawning and regulating existence in general, the "Father" component of the God tripartite might be prior in rank to judgements of good and evil. Much as scientists would feel ridiculous assigning such culture-emergent properties to the mechanistic, indifferent or amoral processes of the universe.

The "Son", OTOH, was embodied in human form and thus very much susceptible to the properties of the cultural stratum. Whether the "Son" was merely the concrete avatar of the generalized Father or was always a fully distinct agent in the divine family is anyone's guess, when interpreting the Biblical mythos. Either way Jesus apparently served as a sympathetic mediator between mortals and the uncompromising demands of the machine-like Almighty. The former able to take into account contingent circumstances and pay the debt for them. Which via the bounds of its nature were impossible for the the latter to acknowledge, mitigate, or repeal.

The "Holy Spirit" apparently served the function of fertilizing and gestating devout believers for apotheosis at a later date (following end-time resurrection, after the millennium of peace, etc -- whatever / whichever). IOW, facilitating their eventual conversion into immortals, gods or demigods themselves; as well as assisting their adherence to a "path of salvation".

 

[Great Old One]

As the cosmogenic principle concerned with spawning and regulating existence in general, the "Father" component of the God tripartite might be prior in rank to judgements of good and evil. Much as scientists would feel ridiculous assigning such culture-emergent properties to the mechanistic, indifferent or amoral processes of the universe.

The "Son", OTOH, was embodied in human form and thus very much susceptible to the properties of the cultural stratum. Whether the "Son" was merely the concrete avatar of the generalized Father or was always a fully distinct agent in the divine family is anyone's guess, when interpreting the Biblical mythos. Either way Jesus apparently served as a sympathetic mediator between mortals and the uncompromising demands of the machine-like Almighty. The former able to take into account contingent circumstances and pay the debt for them. Which via the bounds of its nature were impossible for the the latter to acknowledge, mitigate, or repeal.

The "Holy Spirit" apparently served the function of fertilizing and gestating devout believers for apotheosis at a later date (following end-time resurrection, after the millennium of peace, etc -- whatever / whichever). IOW, facilitating their eventual conversion into immortals, gods or demigods themselves; as well as assisting their adherence to a "path of salvation".

If the "Father" is beyond value judgements while "The Son" embodies morality...then it seems to entail that goodness is not part of God's substance as the two are said to be consubstantial as parts of the trinity. That would seem to be a big problem for traditional theists who like to claim that we know God exists in part by knowing he must be entirely good...as good is a great-making quality any maximal Being would have.

That also makes God's moral prescriptions for mankind impossible to sell aside from adopting divine command theory.

That, of course, terminates in a moral nihilism whereby good/evil have no meaning and you become aware of your existential struggle against an all-powerful and inhuman Being of cosmic horror who threatens you with eternal torture lest you obey His otherwise meaningless commands.

...which can be fairly described as evil.

 

[C C]

[...] That, of course, terminates in a moral nihilism whereby good/evil have no meaning and you become aware of your existential struggle against an all-powerful and inhuman Being of cosmic horror who threatens you with eternal torture lest you obey His otherwise meaningless commands. ...which can be fairly described as evil.

And similarly, affective people can waywardly conceive the passionless activity of a cosmos rigidly unfolding according to the orthodoxy of its lawful-like generalizations to amount to an evil of pitiless neglect when it clashes with our level of biological consciousness.[1]

All the more challenge for any god purported to be handling that basement stratum -- it can't be expected to have anymore humanity than the zombie brain-stems of walking dead. Whether a group chooses an occult face or nature's faceless version for the world's collective patterns of predictability / order -- they can't force the round peg of different level anthropomorphic and cultural properties into the square slot of the former. The machine-like relentlessness or methodicalness of its progression is a difficult challenge to obscure or make excuses for.

The Christian gentiles at least have their adopted, quasi-rehabilitated savior / deity. They would be best to resume that rehabilitation program after its 2000-yr interruption, as well as some retroactive revision. Rather than wasted efforts trying to salvage and retcon the hopeless Hebrew predecessor and its background mythos. Sever all the ties to the latter in the religiously correct update.

Humans invent the standards of their beliefs and systems to begin; they can bloody well reset them when circumstances warrant. Both theists and non-theists seem to have their befuddled moments when they literally act as if their prescriptive practices fell in flaming glory from an objective On High rather than oozed out of their own pens or keyboards. I suppose that's the inevitable result of hand-me down customs and formal guides for operation. The origins may become vague or forgotten, acquire a mysterious aura, and then achieve sacred status (i.e., "Do not tamper with or modify!").

- - - - - - - -

[1] Steven Crane: A man said to the Universe, "Sir, I exist!". "However," replied the Universe, "The fact has not aroused in me a sense of obligation".

Steven Weinberg: The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it also seems pointless.

Richard Dawkins: The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.

 

[DaveC426913]

No, it isn't. However, trying to figure out why you think it is would be a complete waste of time so I think we should just let that go and move on.

Agree. We'll consider that a retraction of post 98.

This seems like an unhelpful attempt to branch into meta-discussion whereby you seek to insult myself or my mother..

Of course it isn't.

It's an attempt to understand the rationale behind your logic that being given the "gift" of life should be regarded as evil, since the gift is not eternal, and may only last a billion years.

To wit:
"His Darkness kills all people. No exceptions. No matter what good you create it will eventually become an evil through privation. "