Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

The Mystery Of God


ColorMixer

Recommended Posts

Hello Everyone,

 

Just recently registered, and long story short I've recently worked through deconversion. I've been speaking with believers at my (now former) church to let them know that I'm leaving the church/no longer believe etc.

 

Though the conversations have been good, there was one where it was obvious he was more interested in debating me than just saying "oh thats cool, I'll pray for you etc".

 

One thing I'm not sure how to address is this: the "mystery" of god. All too often is seems that a line of arguments ends with either 1) It's called faith for a reason 2) We'll find out in heaven, don't worry about it now 3) That aspect of god is beyond our human reasoning, how can we expect to know the mind of god?

 

How do you answer these? I personally think conclusion #3 is a total copout, but in reality seems like something that would make sense. If god is this infinite being beyond humanity, how can humans expect to logically reason who god is? If I argue that that aspect of god makes him not seem like the definition of the Judeo/Christian god, then I feel like they either change the definition of him, or just say "well it seems illogical to us humans, but we are only humans, he is god."

 

What can I say to something like that? It seems to make sense if we define god as being beyond humans. Sorry if this is already adressed somewhere else. Thanks in advance!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Shyone

    11

  • dagnarus

    7

  • ColorMixer

    6

  • godlimations

    5

No god, no mystery. The deep thinkers on this board will be here soon, don't mind me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Everyone,

 

Just recently registered, and long story short I've recently worked through deconversion. I've been speaking with believers at my (now former) church to let them know that I'm leaving the church/no longer believe etc.

 

Though the conversations have been good, there was one where it was obvious he was more interested in debating me than just saying "oh thats cool, I'll pray for you etc".

 

One thing I'm not sure how to address is this: the "mystery" of god. All too often is seems that a line of arguments ends with either 1) It's called faith for a reason 2) We'll find out in heaven, don't worry about it now 3) That aspect of god is beyond our human reasoning, how can we expect to know the mind of god?

 

How do you answer these? I personally think conclusion #3 is a total copout, but in reality seems like something that would make sense. If god is this infinite being beyond humanity, how can humans expect to logically reason who god is? If I argue that that aspect of god makes him not seem like the definition of the Judeo/Christian god, then I feel like they either change the definition of him, or just say "well it seems illogical to us humans, but we are only humans, he is god."

 

What can I say to something like that? It seems to make sense if we define god as being beyond humans. Sorry if this is already adressed somewhere else. Thanks in advance!

This may sound silly, but we can't even say what we mean when we say God is "unknowable." In one sense, if it is not possible to know if god exists, then we have a small conundrum:

 

It is contradictory to claim that god or gods exist and are unknowable. If a god is unknowable, it cannot be known to exist; but to assert that a god exists is to claim that this god is known to exist.

 

If, OTOH, we say that gods exist, but their "nature" is unknowable, then we don't know what a god is, so how can we claim that a god's nature is unknowable and yet claim one exiss?

 

Likewise:

 

To be sure, if one did claim that a god's existence is knowable and a god's nature is unknowable and indeed incomprehensible, one would have no basis for worshipping this god or attributing any moral attributes to the god.

 

To have faith in an unknowable and mysterious god beyond human comprehension is therefore unjustified. Faith itself, which is belief without evidence, is the opposite of reason where reason is evidence. Any claims of faith are therefore as incomprehensible as the object of that faith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If god is such a mystery, why are they so sure they know their theology is correct? Maybe gathering on Sunday mornings and singing crappy songs really pisses him off.

(I'm obviously not one of the deep thinkers)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I'm not sure how to address is this: the "mystery" of god. All too often is seems that a line of arguments ends with either 1) It's called faith for a reason 2) We'll find out in heaven, don't worry about it now 3) That aspect of god is beyond our human reasoning, how can we expect to know the mind of god?

 

How do you answer these? I personally think conclusion #3 is a total copout, but in reality seems like something that would make sense. If god is this infinite being beyond humanity, how can humans expect to logically reason who god is? If I argue that that aspect of god makes him not seem like the definition of the Judeo/Christian god, then I feel like they either change the definition of him, or just say "well it seems illogical to us humans, but we are only humans, he is god."

 

What can I say to something like that? It seems to make sense if we define god as being beyond humans. Sorry if this is already adressed somewhere else. Thanks in advance!

First of all, if you don't want to address those questions, you don't have to. A person doesn't have a right to demand you explain yourself. You can just say you don't want to talk about it if you'd rather not get into those discussions.

 

My response to all three is first, yes, kind of a cop-out, and second, those arguments are only convincing to a person who already believes.

 

In my opinion, if the Christian God is real then we can have some expectations. This God is said by his followers to be loving, truthful, not allowing us to be tempted beyond what we can bear, etc. It's very well to say God is above us puny humans, but if we're expected to believe that he's loving and truthful and wants what is good for us, that means we must be able to have a common definition of love, truth, and good. Those concepts must be understood by God in basically the same way that we do. Otherwise we might as well say that God is opgurk, hewillen, and poew--so you should obviously worship him!!

 

So if God is really loving, truthful, good, not testing us beyond what we can bear, etc., then we should be able to make some sense of him rationally, and the evidence of our environment should at the least not be inconsistent with God's existence. Otherwise God is telling us one thing and doing something completely different, which is not loving or truthful.

 

What I found when I examined the nature of morality and how it is depicted in the Bible is that God does not make sense, and if God is good, his definition of good is much much different from mine. There are others who have come to the same conclusion, and some who have even lived in fear for a while because they thought maybe God did exist and he was evil! I came to the conclusion instead that God was made up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

Hello and welcome.

 

If god is this infinite being beyond humanity, how can humans expect to logically reason who god is?

Well, they claim he wrote a book (inspired it at least) to explain himself to us. As is easily observed, nobody has a fucking clue as to what that book is really saying. Being "made in his image" should also help us understand our creator, but it doesn't.

 

What would be the point of a creator making creatures who have no prayer of ever understanding him? (Excuse the pun.) When he does supposedly reveal himself to various individuals, why do they all come away with conflicting messages?

 

The "mystery" of the divine is built into the story as an out for all the instances the religion doesn't jibe with reality or common sense.

 

At least that's what god told me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you answer these?

Hey there ColorMixer, welcome to ex-C. I was in the process of writing out a rather detailed response but then something occurred to me. I think all of these things are designed to shut down your curiosity and desire to question things. In my opinion, an effective teacher will encourage and inspire your curiosity, not try to stifle it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This may sound silly, but we can't even say what we mean when we say God is "unknowable." In one sense, if it is not possible to know if god exists, then we have a small conundrum:

 

It is contradictory to claim that god or gods exist and are unknowable. If a god is unknowable, it cannot be known to exist; but to assert that a god exists is to claim that this god is known to exist.

 

If, OTOH, we say that gods exist, but their "nature" is unknowable, then we don't know what a god is, so how can we claim that a god's nature is unknowable and yet claim one exiss?

 

Likewise:

 

To be sure, if one did claim that a god's existence is knowable and a god's nature is unknowable and indeed incomprehensible, one would have no basis for worshipping this god or attributing any moral attributes to the god.

 

To have faith in an unknowable and mysterious god beyond human comprehension is therefore unjustified. Faith itself, which is belief without evidence, is the opposite of reason where reason is evidence. Any claims of faith are therefore as incomprehensible as the object of that faith.

 

Thanks everyone for the input. I wanted to address the above quotes. I agree with a lot of these assertions. It seems to me that something can either be known, or unknown. Personally I see it as more black and white. It seems as though many Christians would say that we know certain aspects of god, but that other aspects are unknown. Is something like this possible? Could we conceivably know some things about a god figure but not other things? Example: I've heard it argued that the bible only reveals certain aspects of god but not everything entirely, thus we can't say that we know his nature completely, only what the bible says.

 

If you work on the presupposition that the bible is true, then I can see how this seems to be a very strong argument. But if you work from the ground up (bible isn't true... prove that it is) then that's where it falls apart IMO. So again, I'm still not sure how to address the stance that since this supposed god is beyond us, we can't know everything, but we can know what the bible reveals about god, because it some respects it seems logical.

 

I guess the other way to argue that would be to show bible inconsistencies and different depictions of god's supposed nature. So I dunno, I'm just trying to understand the various arguments back and forth, and am having particularly difficulty with this one.

 

Hopefully I'm making sense, I feel like my words are not doing the ideas justice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to avoid providing you with my answers. I want you to find your own answers. Many greater and lesser minds have debated about the nature of God/gods. Would my answers satisfy you?

 

As for me, I think mystery abounds. There is much we do not yet understand.

 

By the way, you seem to be gravitating towards a branch of philosophy known as epistemology. Here's a quick link in that direction... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I see it as more black and white. It seems as though many Christians would say that we know certain aspects of god, but that other aspects are unknown. Is something like this possible? Could we conceivably know some things about a god figure but not other things? Example: I've heard it argued that the bible only reveals certain aspects of god but not everything entirely, thus we can't say that we know his nature completely, only what the bible says.

 

<snip>

 

I guess the other way to argue that would be to show bible inconsistencies and different depictions of god's supposed nature. So I dunno, I'm just trying to understand the various arguments back and forth, and am having particularly difficulty with this one.

 

Hopefully I'm making sense, I feel like my words are not doing the ideas justice.

Legion is making some excellent points.

 

First, to say something is "unknowable" is to shut down any research, thinking or debate.

 

Second, check out epistemology. It is the root of the problem with learning anything on faith (or by faith).

 

Anyway, Most Christians use the Mystery Card when they are faced with something they can't explain and they don't want to follow it to it's natural conclusions. "God is good!" they say until someone says, "But God ordered the slaughter of women and children," at which point the Christian says, "God's ways are not our ways, and His ways are mysterious, and quit asking me about that."

 

I had the same problems reading the OT after I could actually see the cruelty. Funny how it seemed "normal" to me in some way when I was younger... I finally asked (of myself), "Where did the idea of God come from?" When I started reading ancient Egyptian and Babylonian literature, I realized that Yahweh is a middle-eastern god wannabe that stole from surrounding gods. That is to say, the Hebrews wanted their own god, and they designed him to demand absolute loyalty. The priests could then make demands of the people and say that God wanted it.

 

"God says..."

"Simon says..."

 

The former carries more weight because of the force of law, power of the priests and money involved, but they are essentially the same concept.

 

At least, that's my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to avoid providing you with my answers. I want you to find your own answers. Many greater and lesser minds have debated about the nature of God/gods. Would my answers satisfy you?

 

As for me, I think mystery abounds. There is much we do not yet understand.

 

By the way, you seem to be gravitating towards a branch of philosophy known as epistemology. Here's a quick link in that direction... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology

 

You're right. It's more about the philosophy of "knowing", I will look into it, thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe bring it down to a more familiar concept, since God claims to BE love, since God IS love (1 John 4:16, 1 John 4:8) can we understand the logistics of love itself? Why is love logical? Do we even know what love is? What triggers the mind to "love" your fellow ex-Christian? The word love itself can easily be misunderstood, since according to greek, acknowledges 5 different translations... Do you think love is a mystery also? It's so commonly derived in secular culture, surely we'd know all about it by now right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe bring it down to a more familiar concept, since God claims to BE love, since God IS love (1 John 4:16, 1 John 4:8) can we understand the logistics of love itself? Why is love logical? Do we even know what love is? What triggers the mind to "love" your fellow ex-Christian? The word love itself can easily be misunderstood, since according to greek, acknowledges 5 different translations... Do you think love is a mystery also? It's so commonly derived in secular culture, surely we'd know all about it by now right?

You cherry picked the nice verses, didn't you? No bloody massacres, executing captive women and children, bashing the heads of infants on rocks, hating ones family...

 

Well, anyway, love is a human emotion. That's all it is. You can subdivide into 2,324 types, and they're all human.

 

Gods don't exist, so talking of the love of Baal, Zeus or Quetzalcoatl is meaningless.

 

About the following verse... Punishment should be carried out against those who did wrong, no? What did the children and infants to to deserve this?

 

1 Sam 15

2. This is what the LORD Almighty says: `I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt.

3. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.'"

 

God is love?

 

26. "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters--yes, even his own life--he cannot be my disciple."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe bring it down to a more familiar concept, since God claims to BE love, since God IS love (1 John 4:16, 1 John 4:8) can we understand the logistics of love itself? Why is love logical? Do we even know what love is? What triggers the mind to "love" your fellow ex-Christian? The word love itself can easily be misunderstood, since according to greek, acknowledges 5 different translations... Do you think love is a mystery also? It's so commonly derived in secular culture, surely we'd know all about it by now right?

 

HAH! godlimations, never though I would run into you on here, especially on my first thread. I'm quite familiar with your little Christian newgrounds website.

 

No, love is not a mystery, I know what love is because I experience it, considering it's a human emotion. Though I am myself, and only know what love means to me, from what I have seen it would appear that most other humans (save for maybe psychopaths) share the same kind of emotion. What point are you getting at? God is just a feeling? I would agree that god is (was for me) just a feeling ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If god is such a mystery, why are they so sure they know their theology is correct? Maybe gathering on Sunday mornings and singing crappy songs really pisses him off.

(I'm obviously not one of the deep thinkers)

 

I actually think this is a very pertinent question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This "god is a mystery" stuff is just a red herring, a diversion. If god really wants our belief and worship then he needs to make sense to us. Any god worthy of the name would realize this.

 

A god who demands human sacrifice (Jesus) and threatens us with eternal torture is a psycho and makes no sense to us (any of us who have thought at all about this, anyway) as an entity worthy of worship. No “sin” could be worthy of ETERNAL TORTURE. Therefore, the god of the Christians does not exist.

 

How silly this "mysterious god" argument is. See what happens if we take it to the edge: if god made us in his image, then why aren't we invisible? In fact, what is the "image" of an invisible thing? And if we were made in his image, then does god have an anus? And does he need to use it sometimes? Clearly, the guys who wrote this stuff in the Bible were making it up. They knew next to nothing about how the world really works.

 

These people you are debating with believe because they were told to believe. No god ever showed itself to them. You might remind them of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Everyone,

 

Just recently registered, and long story short I've recently worked through deconversion. I've been speaking with believers at my (now former) church to let them know that I'm leaving the church/no longer believe etc.

 

Though the conversations have been good, there was one where it was obvious he was more interested in debating me than just saying "oh thats cool, I'll pray for you etc".

 

One thing I'm not sure how to address is this: the "mystery" of god. All too often is seems that a line of arguments ends with either 1) It's called faith for a reason 2) We'll find out in heaven, don't worry about it now 3) That aspect of god is beyond our human reasoning, how can we expect to know the mind of god?

 

How do you answer these? I personally think conclusion #3 is a total copout, but in reality seems like something that would make sense. If god is this infinite being beyond humanity, how can humans expect to logically reason who god is? If I argue that that aspect of god makes him not seem like the definition of the Judeo/Christian god, then I feel like they either change the definition of him, or just say "well it seems illogical to us humans, but we are only humans, he is god."

 

What can I say to something like that? It seems to make sense if we define god as being beyond humans. Sorry if this is already adressed somewhere else. Thanks in advance!

It would indeed be a wonderous day if they actually believed any of those three things they are using against you. Well, at least #1 and #3.

 

They don't believe those at all because the entire Christian belief system is indeed claiming to know the mind of God. In every way they will tell you what they think God wants from you, what he expects from you towards others, how to pray, and what punishments from God to expect. They even claim he is fatherlike. They worship the bible. Then, they use this on you like they don't do this themselves. The entire religion is based on knowing God.

 

If they would only allow God to be the mystery it is supposed to be. But, that doesn't bring people into those churches that rely heavily on imagery of what the Divine is. This imagery becomes concrete, or idolized. A mystery belongs to no one. Real faith is letting God be whatever that is and being secure in it. What they have is belief, not faith. :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If god is such a mystery, why are they so sure they know their theology is correct? Maybe gathering on Sunday mornings and singing crappy songs really pisses him off.

(I'm obviously not one of the deep thinkers)

That's absolutely correct par. It seems they have the mystery solved all the way down to the burning sulphur in hell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, not so much of a deep thought as a debate tactic: hoist him by his own petard. So, if the claim of god's supposed "unknowability" comes into play, it is entirely fair to point out that you then can't say anything about god, i.e. the whole goodness/justness/getting candy from the sky-daddy bits, in other words: the selling points. Moreover there would be no way to "know" what the will of god is, mostly because you would know something about an attribute that you don't and can't know exists.

 

In other words, claiming unknowability is pretty much puts yourself into the position of admitting: "Yes, indeed, I am talking out of my ass."

 

Once it is admitted that one *can* know things about god(s), then all kinds of possibilities open up: most of which show that the Christian god is either self-contradictory, or contradicts the whole "all light, holiness, goodness and justice" thing that people like to claim. Just something to keep in mind. Really, claiming "higher purpose", "ways aren't ours", "can't know it", "called faith for a reason", or anything that amounts to "its a mystery", isn't anything intellectual, or involving deep thinking, but it is instead a cop-out specifically to avoid deep thought, or the consequences thereof. It is a child going "la la la I can't hear you", has all the seriousness of it, ultimately, and should not be taken any more seriously than you take a child like that. Really, it's just militant agnosticism (I don't know and you don't either). Even better and more offputting to the other guy, is that claiming that, ultimately, one cannot fully "know" god (despite any first-century "virgin" claims to the contrary) , really makes him an agnostic.

 

 

Now, if their response becomes "I don't know" or "I haven't sorted it out yet", well that is another thing entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This "god is a mystery" stuff is just a red herring, a diversion. If god really wants our belief and worship then he needs to make sense to us. Any god worthy of the name would realize this.

 

A god who demands human sacrifice (Jesus) and threatens us with eternal torture is a psycho and makes no sense to us (any of us who have thought at all about this, anyway) as an entity worthy of worship. No “sin” could be worthy of ETERNAL TORTURE. Therefore, the god of the Christians does not exist.

 

Just because someone is a psycho and they don't make sense to us, that doesn't mean that they don't exist. I can't understand how people could be so cruel as to carry out the inquisition, that doesn't mean that the inquisition didn't happen, nor that the human architects of it didn't exist.

 

How silly this "mysterious god" argument is. See what happens if we take it to the edge: if god made us in his image, then why aren't we invisible? In fact, what is the "image" of an invisible thing? And if we were made in his image, then does god have an anus? And does he need to use it sometimes? Clearly, the guys who wrote this stuff in the Bible were making it up. They knew next to nothing about how the world really works.

 

These people you are debating with believe because they were told to believe. No god ever showed itself to them. You might remind them of this.

 

This is the real issue, I think of it like this, if somebody came up to you claiming that they represent the Queen of England your most likely going to want some proof that they have such authority. How much more would you need proof of the authority of someone who claims to represent the king/queen of the entire universe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the real issue, I think of it like this, if somebody came up to you claiming that they represent the Queen of England your most likely going to want some proof that they have such authority. How much more would you need proof of the authority of someone who claims to represent the king/queen of the entire universe?

Moses got away with, "God told me..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the real issue, I think of it like this, if somebody came up to you claiming that they represent the Queen of England your most likely going to want some proof that they have such authority. How much more would you need proof of the authority of someone who claims to represent the king/queen of the entire universe?

Moses got away with, "God told me..."

How do you know Moses existed? Anyway I'm fairly certain that's why fundamentalists are so desperate to keep all the miracle accounts in the bible as being factual, it counts as proof that the authors of the bible were actually sent by an all-powerful being.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HAH! godlimations, never though I would run into you on here, especially on my first thread. I'm quite familiar with your little Christian newgrounds website.

 

No, love is not a mystery, I know what love is because I experience it, considering it's a human emotion. Though I am myself, and only know what love means to me, from what I have seen it would appear that most other humans (save for maybe psychopaths) share the same kind of emotion. What point are you getting at? God is just a feeling? I would agree that god is (was for me) just a feeling ;)

 

Haha small world :) I take it ur an avid newgrounds user? Fancy it being your first thread, happens to be my first comment in 3 years.

 

Sure I've experienced love plenty a time, I love eating food... To feel emotionally satisfied is not what prompts me to eat, it's simply the choice to remain alive.

 

It doesn't add up that love fits into the category of emotion, you can't disagree the idea that our emotions can illogically contradict our conscience. Does love contradict itself? Then it's not love, it's hypocrisy... Does love force itself? Then it's not love, it's rape. But what IS love as an emotion? Is it kind? Is it patient? How is patience an emotion?

 

So what about the idea that love is not an emotion, but an ability, a virtue, a choice? Our emotions cannot be categorized by this, since it's nothing more than an internal reaction. but our choosing to do the right thing for the sake of what is right, and not by emotion is what I call love. If you explain love as a human emotion, then of course there is no God.

 

You cherry picked the nice verses, didn't you? No bloody massacres, executing captive women and children, bashing the heads of infants on rocks, hating ones family...

 

Well, anyway, love is a human emotion. That's all it is. You can subdivide into 2,324 types, and they're all human.

 

Gods don't exist, so talking of the love of Baal, Zeus or Quetzalcoatl is meaningless.

 

About the following verse... Punishment should be carried out against those who did wrong, no? What did the children and infants to to deserve this?

 

1 Sam 15

2. This is what the LORD Almighty says: `I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt.

3. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.'"

 

God is love?

 

26. "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters--yes, even his own life--he cannot be my disciple."

It makes sense when you apply the law of an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, that the israelites and that their women, children, infants were already at risk from the Amalekites beforehand... What's worse is that the Amalekites weren't open for negotiation. They simply hated the Israelites.

 

You cherry picked Luke 14:26 without regarding context. There is a cost for being transformed, and that you need to KNOW what you're in for before you choose to be a disciple. We have already concluded that the crowd He was speaking to weren't disciples, they were conformed of the worldly ways. They were NOT disciples, therefore, they were NOT transformed. So they were told to hate the world. Yes that includes their own family, even themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It makes sense when you apply the law of an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, that the israelites and that their women, children, infants were already at risk from the Amalekites beforehand... What's worse is that the Amalekites weren't open for negotiation. They simply hated the Israelites.

First, you are quoting the Code of Hamurrabi:

 


     
  • If a man puts out the eye of an equal, his eye shall be put out.
  • If a man knocks the teeth out of another man, his own teeth will be knocked out.

Primative laws for a primative people given out by an earthly ruler who predates the Hebrews. Great source material for God, huh?

 

Second, What about love your enemies? Not good enough?

 

Third, killing captive prisoners is immoral.

 

Fourth, the Amelikites that were being attacked were not of the same generation as the ones that attacked, so the attack was motivated solely by revenge.

 

Fifth, I've never met a child or especially an infant that posed a significant risk to anyone, much less the Israelites.

 

Your morals are abhorrent. And they come from the Bible. It's the same logic that led to the execution of atheists, and that won't endear you to this forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It makes sense when you apply the law of an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, that the israelites and that their women, children, infants were already at risk from the Amalekites beforehand... What's worse is that the Amalekites weren't open for negotiation. They simply hated the Israelites.

 

 

How does god teach his earthly children how to solve cultural and land squabbles?

 

Is it with love, forgiveness and compassion?

 

Hell no, in the nation of Amalek god says, Go attack the Amalekites! Destroy them and all their possessions. Don't have any pity. Kill their men, women, children, and even their babies. 1Samuel 15:3

 

What godlimations argument boils down to is: the neighboring nations are bad, so it's morally acceptable to cause the suffering and bloody, savage, murder of innocent children, babies and pregnant mothers. Naturally, your all-loving god had to viciously, kill the children and babies first, by ordering barbarians to ruthlessly, dispatch them, (showing no compassion or pity by god's charge) using the primitive weapons and war tactics of the day, slashing throats, gutting, stabbing, clubbing, beating, bludgeoning, leaving innocent, children and babies to suffer, in unimaginable pain, while they bleed or burned to death. Suffering for hours or days, while victims, who did survive, suffered for the rest of their lives, with egregious wounds or overwhelming grief. We know some survived, because the Amalekites keep popping up, later in the bible.

 

And who put this insane and abominable plan into action? -- Your loathsome and revolting god. How is a god who uses suffering, murder, bloodletting, genocide, and infanticide, possibly considered all-loving?

 

Why did god create the babies and children, in the first place, knowing he was going to kill them anyways? And god just didn't order the killing of babies and children -- he caused them to suffer!

 

Why does an all-loving god cause babies and children to suffer? Why does a god allow babies to suffer? Presumably, god is all-powerful and all-loving, he could, easily, have waved his hand and magically made the babies and children disappear, without suffering, into his awaiting arms, but no -- egregious suffering was his will. I find that utterly vile and contemptible and I find you -- godlimations -- equally reprehensible, deluded and sick for condoning his atrocious acts, in a vain attempt to salvage your psycho-fuck god's reputation.

 

--S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.