God Doesn't Prevent Terrible Things Because:

[randomatheist]

10, 9, 8.......3, 2, 1. If a parent gets convicted of robbing a bank, then the parent is convicted, but likely the child suffers too for the crime of the parent......like being raised without a parent while they do time in jail.

That wouldn't have been the actual intention behind Deuteronomy 6:15, right? "You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,"

 

Let's keep it real with something, end3. With all intents and purposes of this verse are to instruct its audience that god is willing to hold children all the way to the fourth generation accountable and fully responsible for the sins of their ancestors. This is quite similar to the concept of Adam and Eve's original sin is it not, end3? We are guilty of Adam and Eve's original sin according to the very book that you hold on a daily basis and Deuteronomy is just a branch from that. Way to display willful ignorance end3, but to be fair, this is what we have to expect from the average Xian.

 

"But it's Old Testament Law that Jesus fulfilled"

"But, you're taking it out of context"

"But but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but..."

[RipVanWinkle]

Let's skip to the truth that almost everyone here knows. God doesn't stop terrible things because he does not exist or, if he does exist, he does not have the power or doesn't want to involve himself in human affairs fir reasons we don't know. Nothing complicated about it. It's only when humans make up things about god that things get complicated. Then they meet themselves coming back trying to explain it all. Remember the poem: "Oh, what a tangled web we  weave when first we practice to deceive"  That's Xtianity in a nutshell. Rip

[Guest end3]

 

10, 9, 8.......3, 2, 1. If a parent gets convicted of robbing a bank, then the parent is convicted, but likely the child suffers too for the crime of the parent......like being raised without a parent while they do time in jail.

That wouldn't have been the actual intention behind Deuteronomy 6:15, right? "You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,"

 

Let's keep it real with something, end3. With all intents and purposes of this verse are to instruct its audience that god is willing to hold children all the way to the fourth generation accountable and fully responsible for the sins of their ancestors. This is quite similar to the concept of Adam and Eve's original sin is it not, end3? We are guilty of Adam and Eve's original sin according to the very book that you hold on a daily basis and Deuteronomy is just a branch from that. Way to display willful ignorance end3, but to be fair, this is what we have to expect from the average Xian.

 

"But it's Old Testament Law that Jesus fulfilled"

"But, you're taking it out of context"

"But but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but..."

 

I'm sorry you can not understand that verse any other way.

[mymistake]

 

I'm sorry you can not understand that verse any other way.

 

 

I feel sorry for those who can stretch their brain into all the twists and leaps necessary to excuse

 

God and bend the contradictions of the Bible into mysteries of Truthyness.  That use to be me.

[EyesOpened]

Hello end3.

Could you please interpret these two verses for me. I take them as everyone is accountable for their own sins. Deuteronomy 24:16; II Kings 14:6.

[randomatheist]

 

 

10, 9, 8.......3, 2, 1. If a parent gets convicted of robbing a bank, then the parent is convicted, but likely the child suffers too for the crime of the parent......like being raised without a parent while they do time in jail.

That wouldn't have been the actual intention behind Deuteronomy 6:15, right? "You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,"

 

Let's keep it real with something, end3. With all intents and purposes of this verse are to instruct its audience that god is willing to hold children all the way to the fourth generation accountable and fully responsible for the sins of their ancestors. This is quite similar to the concept of Adam and Eve's original sin is it not, end3? We are guilty of Adam and Eve's original sin according to the very book that you hold on a daily basis and Deuteronomy is just a branch from that. Way to display willful ignorance end3, but to be fair, this is what we have to expect from the average Xian.

 

"But it's Old Testament Law that Jesus fulfilled"

"But, you're taking it out of context"

"But but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but..."

 

I'm sorry you can not understand that verse any other way.

 

You're sorry I don't buy the lies you're bamboozled with.

[Guest end3]

 

 

 

10, 9, 8.......3, 2, 1. If a parent gets convicted of robbing a bank, then the parent is convicted, but likely the child suffers too for the crime of the parent......like being raised without a parent while they do time in jail.

That wouldn't have been the actual intention behind Deuteronomy 6:15, right? "You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,"

 

Let's keep it real with something, end3. With all intents and purposes of this verse are to instruct its audience that god is willing to hold children all the way to the fourth generation accountable and fully responsible for the sins of their ancestors. This is quite similar to the concept of Adam and Eve's original sin is it not, end3? We are guilty of Adam and Eve's original sin according to the very book that you hold on a daily basis and Deuteronomy is just a branch from that. Way to display willful ignorance end3, but to be fair, this is what we have to expect from the average Xian.

 

"But it's Old Testament Law that Jesus fulfilled"

"But, you're taking it out of context"

"But but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but..."

 

I'm sorry you can not understand that verse any other way.

 

You're sorry I don't buy the lies you're bamboozled with.

 

"punishing" in not the only translation. What need do you have to see it a certain way?

[mymistake]

 

 

 

 

10, 9, 8.......3, 2, 1. If a parent gets convicted of robbing a bank, then the parent is convicted, but likely the child suffers too for the crime of the parent......like being raised without a parent while they do time in jail.

That wouldn't have been the actual intention behind Deuteronomy 6:15, right? "You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,"

 

Let's keep it real with something, end3. With all intents and purposes of this verse are to instruct its audience that god is willing to hold children all the way to the fourth generation accountable and fully responsible for the sins of their ancestors. This is quite similar to the concept of Adam and Eve's original sin is it not, end3? We are guilty of Adam and Eve's original sin according to the very book that you hold on a daily basis and Deuteronomy is just a branch from that. Way to display willful ignorance end3, but to be fair, this is what we have to expect from the average Xian.

 

"But it's Old Testament Law that Jesus fulfilled"

"But, you're taking it out of context"

"But but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but..."

 

I'm sorry you can not understand that verse any other way.

 

You're sorry I don't buy the lies you're bamboozled with.

 

"punishing" in not the only translation. What need do you have to see it a certain way?

 

 

 

That is the neat thing about translation.  You can be as creative as you want.  You could translate the word to

 

mean "rewarding".  Integrity and honestly are such a small price to make God into a good guy.

[bornagainathiest]

end3, while you are thinking up a response to BAA's challenge, you might want to consider that most modern Christians are smart enough to back away from the subject of the problem of evil. There's no way for you to win here. If in any way you defend how god has ordered creation you're bound to look like an ass. If you blame god--you're one step closer to denying his existence altogether!

 

Have you ever read Voltaire's little book Candide? It's probably online somewhere, though I'm fond of the Penguin Classics translation by John Butts. If you get a chance, take a read. It's very short--you might read it in one sitting, or a few sittings if you like to proceed slowly. Entertaining, and quite useful in pointing out the silliness of all-things-work-together-for-good-best-of-all-possible-worlds theologies.

 

Jeff, 

 

You'll notice that End3 cannot and will not respond to my challenge.  

That's because, to paraphrase his own words, "he needs to see Genesis in a certain way" and if he responds to my challenge, then he can't do that.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

[StJeffTheIncomprehensible]

BAA,

 

I did notice that. In fact, I've noticed that you have multiple challenges to multiple people floating around out there, and can't seem to coax any believers to give a reasoned response.

 

You'd think that the prospect of shutting an atheist up would be reward enough to get a few takers, at least . . . or maybe they themselves are unsatisfied with the Christian responses to the problem of evil, and choose to flee for refuge to either silence or the appeal to ignorance ("god's ways are mysterious."). There aren't many other alternatives available to them here--any attempt at theodicy seems to end in the believer (and the believer's god) sounding like a callous dick.

[Guest end3]

 

 

 

 

 

10, 9, 8.......3, 2, 1. If a parent gets convicted of robbing a bank, then the parent is convicted, but likely the child suffers too for the crime of the parent......like being raised without a parent while they do time in jail.

That wouldn't have been the actual intention behind Deuteronomy 6:15, right? "You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,"

 

Let's keep it real with something, end3. With all intents and purposes of this verse are to instruct its audience that god is willing to hold children all the way to the fourth generation accountable and fully responsible for the sins of their ancestors. This is quite similar to the concept of Adam and Eve's original sin is it not, end3? We are guilty of Adam and Eve's original sin according to the very book that you hold on a daily basis and Deuteronomy is just a branch from that. Way to display willful ignorance end3, but to be fair, this is what we have to expect from the average Xian.

 

"But it's Old Testament Law that Jesus fulfilled"

"But, you're taking it out of context"

"But but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but..."

 

I'm sorry you can not understand that verse any other way.

 

You're sorry I don't buy the lies you're bamboozled with.

 

"punishing" in not the only translation. What need do you have to see it a certain way?

 

 

 

That is the neat thing about translation.  You can be as creative as you want.  You could translate the word to

 

mean "rewarding".  Integrity and honestly are such a small price to make God into a good guy.

 

Jeff the NIV doesn't even use punishing....

[Ravenstar]

What the hell does it matter what the 'literal' translation is? (and unless you know Koine Greek, or the original Aramaic AND can place that in context along with a deep understanding of the cultural beliefs and references of the time - the translation is almost useless anyway)

 

The fact is people suffer, needlessly. Innocents and deserving alike. There's no rhyme or reason to it. it doesn't matter what colour, creed, religion, age, gender.. whatever. The Bible says God can alleviate that - he is all powerful. Jesus said ask and you SHALL receive. Doesn't happen… for anyone.

 

IF it could be shown that Christians suffered less I might give it a wee bit of merit. But… that is not the case. It's almost like… oh, i don't know… there's nothing there and we all share the same experiences, and shit happens regardless.

[StJeffTheIncomprehensible]

 

Jeff the NIV doesn't even use punishing....

 

 

“Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generations.” This is found in multiple places in the bible (Deut. 5:9-10; Ex. 34:6-7; Num. 14:18; Ex. 20:5-6). The wording I chose here is from the KJV. The RSV and NASB are similar. Some translations say “punish.”

 

You are right, end3, there are several ways to translate these verses, and there are as many ways to interpret them as there are interpreters. You may choose not to see these verses as saying that god punishes the children for the fathers’ sins. Well. Let’s investigate a little bit.

 

It seems you are using your idea of god as the primary interpretive tool to understand this passage of scripture. For a bible Christian, this appears bassackwards to me. In your mind, it would be unfair to punish children for a father’s sins. And since your idea of god entails him being perfectly fair and just, you are willing to ignore what this passage plainly says. What good is the bible for you if you come with preconceived ideas about god and his ways? What information about god can you hope to derive from the bible if you already know what he is like? (If you really don’t believe the bible in all of its parts, then that would be something good to clarify for better understanding where you’re coming from.)

 

Further, for your interpretation to be valid, you not only have to come up with a novel translation of this or that word; you would also need to ignore the parallelism utilized by the writer of this passage, where “visiting the iniquity upon the children” corresponds to “shewing mercy unto thousands.” The bible loves to use these parallelisms, and they are extremely useful in getting at the writer’s meaning. This is a case of antithetic parallelism, a well-known device in Semitic literature.

 

Look at Deut. 5:9-10 and you’ll see what I mean. For those who “hate” god, god will visit the iniquities upon future generations to the third or fourth. For those who “love” god and keep his commandments, god will show mercy unto “thousands [of generations is implied; see Deut. 7:9].” The whole passage is meaningless if the parallelism is ignored. It’s not just a matter of translating this or that word. For the writer of this passage, he evidently thought it manifestly fair of god to either punish or reward future generations based on the actions of an ancestor. In his mind, god is so fair that he limits his punishment to the fourth generation, but lavishes his mercy to the thousands. Doesn’t seem fair to me, but that’s the point of this passage, and I don’t think we get to change the bible based on a preconceived idea. One must accept it, or not. If you don’t accept it, you need to give a more substantial reason than a mere re-interpretation or novel translation.

 

You will also need to explain 1 Kings 21:29, where the bible actually has this principle play out.

 

And you will need to figure out what Paul meant in Rom. 5, and try to answer BAA’s challenge that relates to this problem. “In Adam’s fall, we sinned all” (New England Primer.) Think about ways in which god would be fair to IN ANY WAY hold future generations accountable for the actions of some forebear.

 

The bottom line: your bible god is not as fair as you’d like him to be. You either need to accept that, or deny that the bible gives a reliable description of god—and then figure out where that leaves you.

[bornagainathiest]

BAA,

 

I did notice that. In fact, I've noticed that you have multiple challenges to multiple people floating around out there, and can't seem to coax any believers to give a reasoned response.

 

You'd think that the prospect of shutting an atheist up would be reward enough to get a few takers, at least . . . or maybe they themselves are unsatisfied with the Christian responses to the problem of evil, and choose to flee for refuge to either silence or the appeal to ignorance ("god's ways are mysterious."). There aren't many other alternatives available to them here--any attempt at theodicy seems to end in the believer (and the believer's god) sounding like a callous dick.

 

Jeff,

 

I can't coax a reasoned response from them - because they rely on faith, not reason.

 

And as we know, faith trumps reason every time.

[mymistake]

 

Jeff the NIV doesn't even use punishing....

 

 

King James:

(For the Lord thy God is a jealous God among you) lest the anger of the Lord thy God be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth.

 

NIV:

for the Lord your God, who is among you, is a jealous God and his anger will burn against you, and he will destroy you from the face of the land.

 

NASB:

for the Lord your God in the midst of you is a jealous God; otherwise the anger of the Lord your God will be kindled against you, and He will [g]wipe you off the face of the earth.

 

 

So these other versions simply translate it as genocide.  But Genocide is only wrong when it is not of God.

[Guest Furball]

 

I'm sorry you have not met my threshold for intelligence. Adios.

 

intelligence

 

noun

 

1.

capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding,and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude ingrasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings,etc.

2.

manifestation of a high mental capacity:

He writes with intelligence and wit.

3.

the faculty of understanding.

 

 

 

End3, i had to laugh at this. You don't meet any of the criteria for the above. If you had said i have not met your threshold for mental illness, i would have agreed with you. If the others on here understood what i said, why didn't you? Think about it. Your unintelligent, and illogical answers and sad attempt at humor by stating that you were intelligent have amused me. Here, for your amusement, are some actual facts for you to study, enjoy!

 

Atheists 'have higher IQs': Their intelligence 'makes them more likely to dismiss religion as irrational and unscientific' | Daily Mail Online

 

[Guest Furball]

 

BAA,

 

I did notice that. In fact, I've noticed that you have multiple challenges to multiple people floating around out there, and can't seem to coax any believers to give a reasoned response.

 

You'd think that the prospect of shutting an atheist up would be reward enough to get a few takers, at least . . . or maybe they themselves are unsatisfied with the Christian responses to the problem of evil, and choose to flee for refuge to either silence or the appeal to ignorance ("god's ways are mysterious."). There aren't many other alternatives available to them here--any attempt at theodicy seems to end in the believer (and the believer's god) sounding like a callous dick.

 

Jeff,

 

I can't coax a reasoned response from them - because they rely on faith, not reason.

 

And as we know, faith trumps reason every time.

 

But BAA, end3 says he IS intelligent, and part of the definition of intelligence is the ability to use reason. Are you saying he is lying? (Sarcasm turned off)

[Guest Furball]

BAA,

 

I did notice that. In fact, I've noticed that you have multiple challenges to multiple people floating around out there, and can't seem to coax any believers to give a reasoned response.

 

 

This is what helps awaken other believers to the fallacies of christianity and the bible. Christians who are guests on this site see BAA bringing to the Den: facts, reason, intelligence, sane logic, and actual evidence to back his claims. They then look to the christians who are members of this site to see what they have to say in defense. When they see that the christians on here cannot say anything of merit in return, nor that they can rebuttal with any form of rational logic, reasoning, intelligence, or show any evidence to verify their claims, then it helps them (the guests) to start questioning their faith in what they may be now awakening to....that their religion, and belief in it is false. That is the function of people like end3 on this website. We all know we will never, ever get a rational, intelligent response from him, so we don't expect one. The function of end3 on this website is twofold. 1. It is so that other christian guests will see that as a "defender of the faith", end3 fails miserably to stop the lions mouths with actual, verifiable evidence for his beliefs and claims. 2. His inability to defend the faith by countering BAA with evidence, logic, and intelligent responses causes the visiting christian to question the the validity of their own religion and beliefs, thus possibly deconverting them and helping them to come back to reality, to a place of peace. Basically, end3's use on here is to be a tool to help others escape christianity's death grip. What BAA is doing here is something the christian god fails to do, he is bringing these people back to themselves, back to a place of sanity and mental health....in a word, he is showing mercy. -Cat

[Guest end3]

What's the point of your three post tirade here CC. Enlighten my dumb ass.

[bornagainathiest]

No CC.

 

Don't yield to End's demand to be spoon-fed.  Let him put in the work and figure it out for himself.

[mymistake]

What's the point of your three post tirade here CC. Enlighten my dumb ass.

 

Nobody can enlighten you against your will.  If you actually wanted to learn then nobody could stop you.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

I just want to jump in and say that I also think CC was/is spot on in this thread.  I almost posted yesterday to tell him that he was on a roll. Now I wish I had.

 

I remember how it felt when I was a Christian and I had to face the ugly truth like this. I was angry too. Even though I kept believing for quite a while, there was always a small part of me that never quite felt the same about Biblegod. I could never quite trust him fully again.

I went through the blame the victim stuff. I went through blaming myself for not doing more or praying harder or having enough faith. Of course I blamed the devil too.

I wondered why God didn't  just take care of things like this on his own. He certainly didn't hesitate to flood the world or burn a lot of people to death in Sodom. He didn't wait for money or prayers then and the devil couldn't stop him.

 

I think we all know the logical conclusion of seeing the Bible as it is, and seeing it's God as he describes himself in his book. Fortunately we don't have to choose between following this god or going to Hell. A real, critical examination provides enough common sense evidence that we can know that it is myth and fairy tale.

After that, the only choices are to walk free from it, or keep yourself deluded.

No, it's not spot on. Even science today supports genetic change through nurture. You take many many generations of poor behavior across the scope of humanity and then want to blame a particular religion???? That's asinine. Science points to Grace in this case. It's ALL our faults.

 

 

Wrong.  "Science" doesn't support genetic change through nurture.  End is misusing the term epigenetics, as I explained at the link below.

 

 

 

Another one of End's opinions that is completely and demonstrably wrong.

No, science is more and more certain on this one all the time. See epigenetics.

 

 

And he tries it again in the post above.

 

Here is my post about End and epigenetics.  

 

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/66846-christianity-and-personal-responsibility/?p=1030876

 

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

I think what end is trying to convey is obvious. We need the world to turn back to god. He longs for a time when where the church controls the government and everyone loves and fears god. Like the dark ages. Those were better times. Such a forum like this wouldnt exist and he wouldnt have to bother explaining himself. He could sit back and light a cigar from our smoldering carcasses.

If you think the last forty five years are an improvement in morality, you might want to rethink that.

 

 

This claim was ably refuted by others above,  but I want to add that the world is a much more moral place than it was 45 years ago.  During that time discrimination has reduced, equality has improved for many, and humanitarian aid has increased.  Vaccination rates are up, illnesses are being better treated, and medical ethics have improved.  Humans are making things better all the time, the more they shake off the shackles of religion and make more use of science and other human-made techniques for progress.

[Guest end3]

 

 

I just want to jump in and say that I also think CC was/is spot on in this thread.  I almost posted yesterday to tell him that he was on a roll. Now I wish I had.

 

I remember how it felt when I was a Christian and I had to face the ugly truth like this. I was angry too. Even though I kept believing for quite a while, there was always a small part of me that never quite felt the same about Biblegod. I could never quite trust him fully again.

I went through the blame the victim stuff. I went through blaming myself for not doing more or praying harder or having enough faith. Of course I blamed the devil too.

I wondered why God didn't  just take care of things like this on his own. He certainly didn't hesitate to flood the world or burn a lot of people to death in Sodom. He didn't wait for money or prayers then and the devil couldn't stop him.

 

I think we all know the logical conclusion of seeing the Bible as it is, and seeing it's God as he describes himself in his book. Fortunately we don't have to choose between following this god or going to Hell. A real, critical examination provides enough common sense evidence that we can know that it is myth and fairy tale.

After that, the only choices are to walk free from it, or keep yourself deluded.

No, it's not spot on. Even science today supports genetic change through nurture. You take many many generations of poor behavior across the scope of humanity and then want to blame a particular religion???? That's asinine. Science points to Grace in this case. It's ALL our faults.

 

 

Wrong.  "Science" doesn't support genetic change through nurture.  End is misusing the term epigenetics, as I explained at the link below.

 

 

 

 

Another one of End's opinions that is completely and demonstrably wrong.

No, science is more and more certain on this one all the time. See epigenetics.

 

 

And he tries it again in the post above.

 

Here is my post about End and epigenetics.  

 

 

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/66846-christianity-and-personal-responsibility/?p=1030876

 

??? I thought when scanning that guy's post that he says that epigenetic expression can last several generations??? Did I misread?

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

 

 

I just want to jump in and say that I also think CC was/is spot on in this thread.  I almost posted yesterday to tell him that he was on a roll. Now I wish I had.

 

I remember how it felt when I was a Christian and I had to face the ugly truth like this. I was angry too. Even though I kept believing for quite a while, there was always a small part of me that never quite felt the same about Biblegod. I could never quite trust him fully again.

I went through the blame the victim stuff. I went through blaming myself for not doing more or praying harder or having enough faith. Of course I blamed the devil too.

I wondered why God didn't  just take care of things like this on his own. He certainly didn't hesitate to flood the world or burn a lot of people to death in Sodom. He didn't wait for money or prayers then and the devil couldn't stop him.

 

I think we all know the logical conclusion of seeing the Bible as it is, and seeing it's God as he describes himself in his book. Fortunately we don't have to choose between following this god or going to Hell. A real, critical examination provides enough common sense evidence that we can know that it is myth and fairy tale.

After that, the only choices are to walk free from it, or keep yourself deluded.

No, it's not spot on. Even science today supports genetic change through nurture. You take many many generations of poor behavior across the scope of humanity and then want to blame a particular religion???? That's asinine. Science points to Grace in this case. It's ALL our faults.

 

 

Wrong.  "Science" doesn't support genetic change through nurture.  End is misusing the term epigenetics, as I explained at the link below.

 

 

 

 

Another one of End's opinions that is completely and demonstrably wrong.

No, science is more and more certain on this one all the time. See epigenetics.

 

 

And he tries it again in the post above.

 

Here is my post about End and epigenetics.  

 

 

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/66846-christianity-and-personal-responsibility/?p=1030876

 

??? I thought when scanning that guy's post that he says that epigenetic expression can last several generations??? Did I misread?

 

 

You misunderstood it. Try reading it instead of scanning it.