Why Does the God of the Old Testament Seem So Cruel and Judgmental?
The God in the Old Testament seems to have many personalities; cruel, unjust, kind, loving, etc."1 There are, however, two major areas which we humans have a difficult time reconciling - God's love vs. God's righteousness. God is loving, but God's love requires God's justice. As I discipline my three children when they disobey, God disciplines us if we don't meet His requirements. The problem for us is that we cannot keep all of God's laws because of our selfishness and self-centeredness.2 God would have been completely just and loving in destroying all of us for our disobedience to Him. It is only through His extraordinary love and grace that we are allowed into His presence.

If you were to read atheist's websites, you will often find complaints that the God of the Bible arbitrarily ordered the destruction of entire cities, just to allow the Jews to have a homeland in the Middle East. How could a loving God command the destruction of all those innocent people? The argument sounds good, but it is utterly false. The unstated assumption is that the people who God ordered destroyed were morally equivalent to the Jews, who replaced them. However, this is what the Bible says about the people who were destroyed:

"It is not for your righteousness or for the uprightness of your heart that you are going to possess their land, but it is because of the wickedness of these nations that the LORD your God is driving them out before you, in order to confirm the oath which the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. (Deuteronomy 9:5)

Okay, how "wicked" could those people have been? How about killing their own sons and daughters by burning them in sacrifices to their gods:

"You shall not behave thus toward the LORD your God, for every abominable act which the LORD hates they have done for their gods; for they even burn their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods. (Deuteronomy 12:31)

The wickedness of these people is confirmed in other verses of the Bible.3 So we see that these people are not quite as innocent as the atheists would like you to believe. Then again, maybe those atheists believe that killing your children is not all bad. After all, killing viable pre-born babies is legal in this country (it's called a choice, a.k.a. abortion). For these reasons (and others4), God ordered the destruction of the peoples whom the Israelites dispossessed.

In order to maintain His righteousness, God must judge sin - everything that goes against His character. If God let everyone into heaven, then He would have to allow in people such as Stalin and Hitler. Obviously, heaven would not be a good place to be with the likes of those people there. Therefore, God's righteousness requires the judgment of all sin. Only those people who agree with God and are willing to allow themselves to be changed into sinless beings can enter into heaven. For information on how to do this, click here.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References
I would caution you not to judge God, since it is said, "Therefore you are without excuse, every man of you who passes judgment, for in that you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things." (Romans 2:1)
For all of us have become like one who is unclean, And all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment; And all of us wither like a leaf, And our iniquities, like the wind, take us away. (Isaiah 64:6)
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23)
as it is written, "There is none righteous, not even one;" (Romans 3:10)
and the Avvites made Nibhaz and Tartak; and the Sepharvites burned their children in the fire to Adrammelech and Anammelech the gods of Sepharvaim. (2 Kings 17:31)
"When the LORD your God cuts off before you the nations which you are going in to dispossess, and you dispossess them and dwell in their land, beware that you are not ensnared to follow them, after they are destroyed before you, and that you do not inquire after their gods, saying, 'How do these nations serve their gods, that I also may do likewise?' (Deuteronomy 12:29-30)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Racism in the Bible?
Introduction
The claim is often made that the Bible is racist and that Christianity encourages racism. While there are people who claim the name of Christ and preach racist hatred in Christian churches, the Bible does not condone, but actually condemns this kind of behavior. Let's see what the Bible actually says about racism.

What the Old Testament says about people of other races
Although the Jews are described as God's chosen people, God did not choose them as the only people with whom He wanted to have a relationship. Even as God's chosen people, the Jews were warned not to oppress people of other races,1 but there was to be one standard and one law for all people in Israel.2 In fact, the Old Testament commands Israelites to love foreigners and strangers.3 The choice of the Israelites on God's part was not one that was made with regard to race or any superiority. In fact, God did not choose the Israelites because of their righteousness,4 but because of God's love. God's choice was not simply to play favoritism, but He chose one people through whom the Messiah would come to offer salvation to all peoples of the world.5

An example of racial cooperation in action can be found in the story of Ruth, which is the story of the compassion and redemption of the gentile woman, Ruth. Naomi, Ruth's mother-in-law, fell into the unfortunate circumstances of losing both her husband and her two sons, one of whom was Ruth's husband. With nobody to provide for her and Naomi being "too old" to be remarried, she chose to go to Israel, where the laws and traditions required the Israelites to take care of widows, even if they were strangers. One of Naomi's daughter-in-laws chose to stay in the land in order to find another husband. But Ruth chose to go with her mother-in-law, even though this meant that she would probably never be married. However, Ruth was "redeemed" by Boaz, who married her despite the fact that she was a gentile. Boaz is a preview of the unconditional love of Christ:

Then she fell on her face, bowing to the ground and said to him, "Why have I found favor in your sight that you should take notice of me, since I am a foreigner?" And Boaz answered and said to her, "All that you have done for your mother-in-law after the death of your husband has been fully reported to me, and how you left your father and your mother and the land of your birth, and came to a people that you did not previously know. (Ruth 2:10-11)

The line of Ruth and Boaz led directly to King David, and, of course, eventually to the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth.

What the New Testament says about people of other races
The New Testament is the story of the fulfillment of the Old Testament promises in the person of Jesus Christ. Jesus said that He was sent to minister only to the Jewish people.6 Even so, He healed both Jew and Gentile, including Canaanites,7 Syrophoenicians,8 and Samaritans.9 In addition to healing those of other races, Jesus proclaimed the gospel to those of other races when He met them. The woman at the well is a prime example. When Jesus asked her for a drink, her first reaction was disbelief that he would even talk to her, since she was a Samaritan.10 When Jesus' disciples came back, they were surprised that He was talking to her.11 Jesus' behavior would have been though to be unusual, since the Jews at that time considered it unlawful to associate with non-Jews.12

Jesus gave several examples of heaven, some of which included references to race. In one example, He compared heaven to a net cast into the sea, which catches many "kinds" of fish.13 The Greek word for "kinds" is genos (Strong's number G1085), from which we get our words "gene" or "genetics." Those that are good (righteous) are saved, while the others are discarded.14

Jesus included people of other races in His parables. The most famous example is the one of the good Samaritan, who helped a man who had been robbed and beaten to near death. This non-Jew did the will of God through his good works, while religious Jews avoided the man and left Him to die on the road. In another example, Jesus described the actions of those who would be justified by Him. In the description, He said that those who know Him would be kind to strangers and invite them in.15 The Greek word for "strangers" is "zenos" (Strong's number G3581), from which we get words such as zenograph (transplant between different species). Therefore, Jesus affirmed the old Testament commands to help people of other races. A third example is from a parable Jesus told about the kingdom of heaven and who would be allowed in.16 In the story, a man (representing God, the Father) was giving a big dinner (representing heaven) and invited his friends (representing the Jews of Israel). All of his friends made excuses and didn't want to go to the dinner. So the man invited the poor and crippled and blind and lame, who came. Even so, there was still room, so people were invited from everywhere (non-Jewish races) to join in the dinner.

These parables and examples were carried out in the real world at the end of Jesus' ministry on the Earth. Before leaving, Jesus told the apostles to make disciples from every nation,17 reaffirming the value of all people. Following Jesus' return to heaven, the Holy Spirit was sent on Pentecost.18 Since it was a major Jewish holiday (celebrating the giving of the law), people from many races and nations were present when the Holy Spirit was given.19 The Holy Spirit led the apostles to witness to many people of other races, as described throughout the book of Acts. One example was a black Ethiopian eunuch from the court of the queen of the Ethiopians.20 God sent an angel to Philip telling him to "go south to the road--the desert road--that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza."21 There Philip met an Ethiopian, witnessed to and baptized him22 and bringing Christianity to Africa.

The bottom line

Both the Old and New Testaments say that God shows no partiality, but judges with complete justice.23 Likewise, Jesus showed no partiality.24 By example, we are also told to show no partiality, but treat all people fairly.25

The essence of biblical equality can be summed up in the Bible's book of Galatians:

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:28)26

Even though the world does not always treat humans as equals, as members of the body of Christ, all are equal spiritually in the eyes of Jesus. In fact, those who exalt themselves will be humbled and those who serve others will be exalted to a higher status in the kingdom of heaven.27 The bible says that there will be "a great multitude, which no one could count" in heaven, and that these people will be "from every nation and all tribes and peoples and tongues."28

Prejudice and racism has always been one of my "hot buttons," even before I became a Christian. Racism is indefensible on both moral and biological grounds. Since becoming a Christian, I have been impressed how the Bible reaches out to people of all races and backgrounds. The list above is a small fraction of the examples that can be found in the Bible.

A couple examples of events I have experienced in my Christian life have encouraged me that heaven is going to be an awesome place to experience the best of humanity's diversity. One time I was at a Promise Keepers conference, which was attended by men of all races. At lunch time, as I was getting up, I automatically starting collecting my stuff (jacket, Bible, etc.) to head to the parking lot for our meal. However, the guys I was with said, "let's leave it", and I noticed that everyone else was leaving their stuff on the seats. It hit me that heaven would be like that - not having to worry that someone would steal your things if you left them. Another time was at a rally for unity, which was put on by a church in Pasadena, CA. The sponsoring church was ~95% black, and I was one of the few white persons to march in the rally. However, as we were walking and talking and singing, we were all brothers in the Lord and I am sure I will see them again in heaven. Heaven is not going to be some white-man's world, but a place where everyone loves the Lord, and can appreciate the uniqueness of the individual. I look forward to the time when I won't have to deal with the haters and racists that surround me in this life.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Related Pages:
Does God condone slavery in the Bible? (Old Testament) by Glenn Miller (Christian Think Tank)
Does God condone slavery in the Bible? (New Testament) by Glenn Miller (Christian Think Tank)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References
"And you shall not wrong a stranger or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. (Exodus 22:21)
"And you shall not oppress a stranger, since you yourselves know the feelings of a stranger, for you also were strangers in the land of Egypt. (Exodus 23:9)
'Thus says the LORD, "Do justice and righteousness, and deliver the one who has been robbed from the power of his oppressor. Also do not mistreat or do violence to the stranger, the orphan, or the widow; and do not shed innocent blood in this place. (Jeremiah 22:3)
and do not oppress the widow or the orphan, the stranger or the poor; and do not devise evil in your hearts against one another.' (Zechariah 7:10)
'When a stranger resides with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. (Leviticus 19:33)
"But if a stranger sojourns with you, and celebrates the Passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near to celebrate it; and he shall be like a native of the land. (Exodus 12:48)
"The same law shall apply to the native as to the stranger who sojourns among you." (Exodus 12:49)
'Nor shall you glean your vineyard, nor shall you gather the fallen fruit of your vineyard; you shall leave them for the needy and for the stranger. I am the LORD your God. (Leviticus 19:10)
'There shall be one standard for you; it shall be for the stranger as well as the native, for I am the LORD your God.'" (Leviticus 24:22)
'The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself; for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God. (Leviticus 19:34)
"Know, then, it is not because of your righteousness that the LORD your God is giving you this good land to possess, for you are a stubborn people. (Deuteronomy 9:6)
"And I will multiply your descendants as the stars of heaven, and will give your descendants all these lands; and by your descendants all the nations of the earth shall be blessed; (Genesis 26:4)
Then it will come about in that day That the nations will resort to the root of Jesse, Who will stand as a signal for the peoples; And His resting place will be glorious. (Isaiah 11:10)
"Behold, My Servant, whom I uphold; My chosen one in whom My soul delights. I have put My Spirit upon Him; He will bring forth justice to the nations. (Isaiah 42:1)
He says, "It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant To raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved ones of Israel; I will also make You a light of the nations So that My salvation may reach to the end of the earth." (Isaiah 49:6)
"And I will set a sign among them and will send survivors from them to the nations: Tarshish, Put, Lud, Meshech, Rosh, Tubal, and Javan, to the distant coastlands that have neither heard My fame nor seen My glory. And they will declare My glory among the nations. (Isaiah 66:19)
But He [Jesus] answered and said, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matthew 15:24)
And behold, a Canaanite woman came out from that region, and began to cry out, saying, "Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David; my daughter is cruelly demon-possessed." ...she came and began to bow down before Him, saying, "Lord, help me!" ...Then Jesus answered and said to her, "O woman, your faith is great; be it done for you as you wish." And her daughter was healed at once. (Matthew 15:22-28)
But after hearing of Him, a woman whose little daughter had an unclean spirit, immediately came and fell at His feet. Now the woman was a Gentile, of the Syrophoenician race. And she kept asking Him to cast the demon out of her daughter... And He said to her, "Because of this answer go your way; the demon has gone out of your daughter." And going back to her home, she found the child lying on the bed, the demon having departed. (Mark 7:25-30)
As he was going into a village, ten men who had leprosy met him. They stood at a distance and called out in a loud voice, "Jesus, Master, have pity on us!" When he saw them, he said, "Go, show yourselves to the priests." And as they went, they were cleansed. One of them, when he saw he was healed, came back, praising God in a loud voice. He threw himself at Jesus' feet and thanked him--and he was a Samaritan. And Jesus answered and said, "Were there not ten cleansed? But the nine-- where are they? "Was no one found who turned back to give glory to God, except this foreigner?" And He said to him, "Rise, and go your way; your faith has made you well." (Luke 17:12-19)
The Samaritan woman said to Him [Jesus], "You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me for a drink?" (For Jews do not associate with Samaritans.) (John 4:9)
Just then his disciples returned and were surprised to find him talking with a woman. But no one asked, "What do you want?" or "Why are you talking with her?" (John 4:27)
And he [Peter] said to them, "You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a man who is a Jew to associate with a foreigner or to visit him; and yet God has shown me that I should not call any man unholy or unclean. (Acts 10:28) The word translated "foreigner" (Strong's number G246) is allophulos, from Strong's number G243 and phulon, which has the meaning "a stock, race, of another race or foreigner."
"Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a dragnet cast into the sea, and gathering fish of every kind; and when it was filled, they drew it up on the beach; and they sat down, and gathered the good fish into containers, but the bad they threw away." (Matthew 13:47-48)
"So it will be at the end of the age; the angels shall come forth, and take out the wicked from among the righteous," (Matthew 13:49)
'For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in; (Matthew 25:35)
But He said to him, "A certain man was giving a big dinner, and he invited many; and at the dinner hour he sent his slave to say to those who had been invited, 'Come; for everything is ready now.' "But they all alike began to make excuses. The first one said to him, 'I have bought a piece of land and I need to go out and look at it; please consider me excused.' "And another one said, 'I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I am going to try them out; please consider me excused.' "And another one said, 'I have married a wife, and for that reason I cannot come.' "And the slave came back and reported this to his master. Then the head of the household became angry and said to his slave, 'Go out at once into the streets and lanes of the city and bring in here the poor and crippled and blind and lame.' "And the slave said, 'Master, what you commanded has been done, and still there is room.' "And the master said to the slave, 'Go out into the highways and along the hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled. 'For I tell you, none of those men who were invited shall taste of my dinner.'" (Luke 14:16-24)
"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit," (Matthew 28:19)
And when the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. And suddenly there came from heaven a noise like a violent, rushing wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. And there appeared to them tongues as of fire distributing themselves, and they rested on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance. (Acts 2:1-4)
"Parthians and Medes and Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the districts of Libya around Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabs-- we hear them in our own tongues speaking of the mighty deeds of God." (Acts 2:9-11)
And he arose and went; and behold, there was an Ethiopian eunuch, a court official of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, who was in charge of all her treasure; and he had come to Jerusalem to worship. (Acts 8:27)
Now an angel of the Lord said to Philip, "Go south to the road--the desert road--that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza." (Acts 8:26)
And he ordered the chariot to stop; and they both went down into the water, Philip as well as the eunuch; and he baptized him. (Acts 8:38)
"For the LORD your God is the God of gods and the Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God who does not show partiality, nor take a bribe. (Deuteronomy 10:17)
And opening his mouth, Peter said: "I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality, (Acts 10:34)
For there is no partiality with God. (Romans 2:11)
For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit. (1 Corinthians 12:13)
But from those who were of high reputation (what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)-- well, those who were of reputation contributed nothing to me. (Galatians 2:6)
And if you address as Father the One who impartially judges according to each man's work, conduct yourselves in fear during the time of your stay upon earth; (1 Peter 1:17)
And, masters, do the same things to them, and give up threatening, knowing that both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no partiality with Him. (Ephesians 6:9)
And they sent their disciples to Him, along with the Herodians, saying, "Teacher [Jesus], we know that You are truthful and teach the way of God in truth, and defer to no one; for You are not partial to any. (Matthew 22:16)
And they came and said to Him, "Teacher [Jesus], we know that You are truthful, and defer to no one; for You are not partial to any, but teach the way of God in truth. Is it lawful to pay a poll-tax to Caesar, or not? (Mark 12:14)
And they questioned Him, saying, "Teacher [Jesus], we know that You speak and teach correctly, and You are not partial to any, but teach the way of God in truth. (Luke 20:21)
nor shall you be partial to a poor man in his dispute. (Exodus 23:3)
'You shall do no injustice in judgment; you shall not be partial to the poor nor defer to the great, but you are to judge your neighbor fairly. (Leviticus 19:15)
'You shall not show partiality in judgment; you shall hear the small and the great alike. You shall not fear man, for the judgment is God's. And the case that is too hard for you, you shall bring to me, and I will hear it.' (Deuteronomy 1:17)
"You shall not distort justice; you shall not be partial, and you shall not take a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and perverts the words of the righteous. (Deuteronomy 16:19)
"Now then let the fear of the LORD be upon you; be very careful what you do, for the LORD our God will have no part in unrighteousness, or partiality, or the taking of a bribe." (2 Chronicles 19:7)
"Let me now be partial to no one; Nor flatter any man. (Job 32:21)
To show partiality to the wicked is not good, Nor to thrust aside the righteous in judgment. (Proverbs 18:5)
These also are sayings of the wise. To show partiality in judgment is not good. (Proverbs 24:23)
To show partiality is not good, Because for a piece of bread a man will transgress. (Proverbs 28:21)
I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of His chosen angels, to maintain these principles without bias, doing nothing in a spirit of partiality. (1 Timothy 5:21)
But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. (James 2:9)
This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference. (Romans 3:22)
For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call upon Him; (Romans 10:12)
"And whoever exalts himself shall be humbled; and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted. (Matthew 23:12)
"Whoever then humbles himself as this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 18:4)
Humble yourselves, therefore, under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you at the proper time, (1 Peter 5:6)
And sitting down, He called the twelve and said to them, "If anyone wants to be first, he shall be last of all, and servant of all." (Mark 9:35)
After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude, which no one could count, from every nation and all tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, and palm branches were in their hands; and they cry out with a loud voice, saying, "Salvation to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb." (Revelation 7:9-10)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Don't think the bible promotes hatred and death. It is all about the opposite: love and life.

Yours in Christ,

Kevin

Kevin,

The bible reflects the ideas of men who lived in barbaric times when life was short and times were hard and disease and pain were everyday occurrences for nearly everyone.

For those who wished power to rule meant imposing simple but harsh rules - do as we say or die. Creating a mythological God who had the power to deal out eternal torment in an imaginary afterlife provided a powerful political tool for controlling the superstitious, ignorant and illiterate masses. The sheer fear of God was and is the primary operating principle behind Christianity, that and the desire to live forever in a utopian paradise.

The bible stories of a God and his divine son are pure fiction.

Yours most definitely not in a fictional Christ,

Kat

Many bad things happened to societies in the biblical world. Bad things still happen. When you try to apply a personality to these events, the personality is bound to appear cruel. But we don't think of God as cruel, or we don't want to think of God as cruel, so complex explanations are required. We say that those societies deserved it because they were evil. But think about it, the christian view is that everyone is fallen, so every society will contain "sinners", therefore if we analyze events through these filters, you can justify any destructive event. But destructive natural events are indifferent. There are numerous accounts of lightning hiting churches and burning them to the ground. The bible appears cruel because the ancient Jews, the authors of the old testament, wanted the world to make sense. It doesn't. So, they create the mysterious nature of God, and place all the sense in there, inscrutable and infinitely just.

Let's see if Noahs flood passes as gods love.

God is dissapointed with man and therefore decides to kill them off except for one family. So Noah and his family and a pair of all animals get on board the ark and the rain starts.

After while the waters start rising people are getting scared, they are heading for high ground and so do the animals. The waters keep rising many people and animals are now at the highest land peaks scared out of their minds. Mothers clutching their babies, old folks who can not compete with the young ones being stepped over by the strong ones, animals fighting with man over the last piece of land, and the waters keep rising till ther's no more land and the last of the strongest finally lets go and sinks into the watery abyss.


And god says this is good, I liked the part where those poor mothers were holding their infants up over the water hoping for some miracle to save them haha.
And did you get a load of those elephants trying to climb those hills, that cracked me up.

Hey pal what human in his right mind would accept a sadistic and incompetent god?

Why rain for 40 days/nights when he can snap his fingers and make everybody dissapear? No blood, no suffering, no mess without killing all the animals and children, why the torture?

What does yours in Christ mean?
Are you inside Christ?
Is Christ God, and you are an aspect of God?
This was the real gospel, the good news, which I submit, never got out, that we are, in a very direct way (like a father to a son), god. Jesus was just a very powerful son of god. This is why we don't need the scribes, this is why Jesus never wrote one gospel, it is written in everyone's heart if you are open to it. You and the creation (for lack of a better term) are one. The creator and the creation are one.

Its good that you are not racist, but christianity in practice, for 400 years in America, was blind to the most cruel forms of racism. It is only because blacks and liberals stood up to christian, conservative, white separatist, racist ideology, that you are now catching up. You still have alot of catching up to do. Why don't we follow the old testament anymore and stone adulterers? Yet we use the Old Testament to condemn gay people. Jesus was a wise person, but few understood, not even some of his disciples. The bible was compiled by people I would not trust, the same who killed Jesus, the Romans, and further distorted for political ends by King James. Perhaps the Gospel of John and some of the Gnostic gospels contain a bit of Jesus' wisdom, the rest should be ceremoniously burned every Easter.

Why does the Bible sometimes seem cruel?

*Drum roll* Because it is. (Occam's Razor, biatch!)

Notice how, today, churchgoers continue to quote ancient OT verses to prove that homosexuality is evil and wrong, and yet they rarely invoke passages (that appear in the same books, mind you) to prove that slavery is good. Why all the selectivity? Because parts of the Bible are cruel and barbaric, and the faster those OT verses lose their credibility, the faster we advance as a society.

Josh

It's just a ride. - Bill Hicks

What does yours in Christ mean?
Are you inside Christ?
Is Christ God, and you are an aspect of God?
This was the real gospel, the good news, which I submit, never got out, that we are, in a very direct way (like a father to a son), god. Jesus was just a very powerful son of god. This is why we don't need the scribes, this is why Jesus never wrote one gospel, it is written in everyone's heart if you are open to it. You and the creation (for lack of a better term) are one. The creator and the creation are one.

I felt this way before I became a Christian.

Christ inside me? That was even, to a point ... just gay ... in middle school.

But when you actually accept Him into your heart there is an indescribable feeling of peace. I presume you are an atheist. You haven't felt it yet. Trust me man its like spiritual ecstacy.

I say make it my habit to sign posts "Yours in Christ" because it reminds me to check and make sure everything I say is out of love and encouragement, never hate. Just so that I can portray his love in the best, most accurate way I can. It's like having Jesus himself read over what I write, make sure it is truth, and then send it.

I know it sounds ridiculous to you. I dont blame you. It sounded dumb to me too. Until I got to know him.

Yours in Christ,

Kevin

Why does the Bible sometimes seem cruel?

*Drum roll* Because it is. (Occam's Razor, biatch!)

Notice how, today, churchgoers continue to quote ancient OT verses to prove that homosexuality is evil and wrong, and yet they rarely invoke passages (that appear in the same books, mind you) to prove that slavery is good. Why all the selectivity? Because parts of the Bible are cruel and barbaric, and the faster those OT verses lose their credibility, the faster we advance as a society.

Josh

It's just a ride. - Bill Hicks

That makes sense. Sometimes I look at the Old Testament and say "What the hell is going on here? They're killing babies and stuff, man!" But as I read through it, the Bible speaks of God's retribution against sinful and rebellious societies like the Canaanites and the Babylonians. God is a loving being and doesn't have people killed for the hell of it. He is protecting His people, (that is, the ones that don't have their children burned alive sacrificed to idols), by removing the influence of those who do.

Keep in mind that there also exists the New Testament. Personally, I believe that the Old Testament is a statement of God's power a bit more than his love. The New Testament stresses power THROUGH love. There are also symbolic references in the Old Testament that link to the New Testament in terms of prophecy. Hundreds, in fact. Some of these more cruel stories are foretellings of what had to happen to Jesus in order for Him to be a sinless sacrifice to purge believers from their sins.

The New Testament is overflowing with verses about God's healing, love, personal nature, power, and moral guidelines through the teachings of Jesus. It ends in Revelations, a book about the apocalypse, loaded with symbolism. This is when Jesus will come and destroy all evil in the world. It is a book of hope for some and warning for others. As a Christian, I cannot wait until Jesus' return; that will be the day when I meet my Lord in heaven.

Yours in Christ,

Kevin

the Bible speaks of God's retribution against sinful and rebellious societies like the Canaanites and the Babylonians. God is a loving being and doesn't have people killed for the hell of it. He is protecting His people, (that is, the ones that don't have their children burned alive sacrificed to idols), by removing the influence of those who do.

So, it was absolutely necessary that a loving god send two bears to maul 42 kids for making fun of Elisha? If God hadn't immediately struck down Onan for not impregnating his dead brother's wife, all hell would have broken loose? If God had failed to inform the Jews of how to properly beat their slaves (i.e., just don't kill them), evil would have reigned supreme?

Meanwhile, Lott the drunken, cowardly ass was a "righteous man."

These are hardly the acts of a deity who is merely watching out for his people or purging the world of the most offensive sin - this is a God who seems to delight in killing people for extremely trivial reasons (often for violating cultural taboos of ancient society). Looking back we see that rape, torture, murder, genocide, slavery, etc. were and still are probably bigger problems than making fun of bald people.

Keep in mind that there also exists the New Testament. Personally, I believe that the Old Testament is a statement of God's power a bit more than his love. The New Testament stresses power THROUGH love. There are also symbolic references in the Old Testament that link to the New Testament in terms of prophecy. Hundreds, in fact. Some of these more cruel stories are foretellings of what had to happen to Jesus in order for Him to be a sinless sacrifice to purge believers from their sins.

Wonderful. It's still a cruel book. Just because the second half is a tad better doesn't exactly redeem it. Osama bin Laden could renounce terrorism and become a disciple of love tomorrow, but I still wouldn't want to bunk with him, ya know?

Josh

It's just a ride. - Bill Hicks

After while the waters start rising people are getting scared, they are heading for high ground and so do the animals. The waters keep rising many people and animals are now at the highest land peaks scared out of their minds. Mothers clutching their babies, old folks who can not compete with the young ones being stepped over by the strong ones, animals fighting with man over the last piece of land, and the waters keep rising till ther's no more land and the last of the strongest finally lets go and sinks into the watery abyss.Except for those who, like my ancestors, said, "Gee, this rain doesn't seem to be stopping." and built boats of their own.

Unfortunately, mine landed in Italy and it was only a matter of time till God caught up with them again.

;)

~Raithere

Kevin,

But when you actually accept Him into your heart there is an indescribable feeling of peace. I presume you are an atheist. You haven't felt it yet. Trust me man its like spiritual ecstacy.Your arrogance reveals your ignorance. Many atheists become so because they have been where you are and eventually recognized the brainwashing and had the intelligence to reject it. It is easy to be seduced by tantalizing stories of a world and a life of perfection that many so desperately seek; an escape from the inevitable death that faces everyone. But it is only a dream, a fantasy, as is your god; and your savior is no more than a myth. It is true your self-delusion can make you happy and provide feelings of contentment; but it is only a delusion. People have been imagining gods for many thousands of years and as yet not a single instance has revealed itself. Neither is there any shred of evidence to indicate such a thing might be, is, or could ever be possible.

Take care with how you perceive atheists – clearly you have never been one and it would appear you have been indoctrinated into religion since birth. Perhaps it is time to broaden your horizons. Religion is a dead zone, a waste of time.

Kat

Jo Kevin dude,

"Why Does the God of the Old Testament Seem So Cruel and Judgmental?"

God SEEMS that way, because in the OT he IS that way. This is simple. What is not simple, is reconciling the Christian portrayel of their god, who is supposedly loving, compassionate, forgiving, etc. with the dude from the OT. It takes a LOT of explaining. Just check the lenght of your post Kev. And you have`nt even started to convince me dude!

Now explain this one dude. (just one example of hundreds if not thousands)

"Exodus 4:23
And I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if thou refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn.

(Here god wants to kill poor Pharoahs little boy ... remember your god is omnipotent)

4:24
And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the LORD met him, and sought to kill him."

And here God decides to kill Moses because his son wasn't circumcised. Tel me Kev would you kill your boy for a bit of skin?

Don`t post a bible dude, just explain to me simply how a loving gods attitude can be so weird.

Allcare.

Okay. Sorry about that. Here's some links some sites I found that explain this stuff:

http://www.carm.org/questions/firstborn_egypt.htm

i g2g i'll post more later

Kevin,

Just a little problem with the article you quoted – it says at the end –

It means that God was arranging history to bear witness of the greatest act of love: the crucifixion. This states quite clearly that the crucifixion wasn’t a reaction to the human race gone astray but a planned event from the beginning of time. Flooding the world and killing nearly everyone must have been planned then, and the various and numerous massacres that God arranged were all planned in advance. It is curious why God would originally create a creature that was so imperfect if that isn’t what he wanted – but wait – he is perfect so everything that happens must be according to his master plan.

And all because he was arranging to have his son killed – the ultimate sacrifice – a father losing his only son for the sake of the human race - an incredible demonstration of love. Ah but wait – didn’t he resurrect 3 days later? And isn’t he meant to be alive today? So where is the sacrifice? What did God give up for the sake of the human race that demonstrates his incredible love?

I cannot see that God gave up or lost anything. Now if Jesus, a god, had really died permanently and didn’t resurrect then THAT would have demonstrated an incredible act of love.

The crucifixion is a fraud – a completely meaningless facade.

So what we have apparently is a God that deliberately creates an imperfect being who not surprisingly is persistently disobedient requiring God to continuously kill him in large numbers. And all for the sake of a pretended demonstration of his love for man.

It looks very much like God is simply a callous and evil creature that enjoys inflicting pain and designs a universe where he can do this frequently. I see no love here of any kind.

Kat

I felt this way before I became a Christian.
This is a very interesting point. The experience of connection with the devine, or cosmic conciousness, or enlightenment, or whatever you want to call it is an experience common to mankind in all cultures. When trying to describe this to others, we are necessarily limited to the language and mythology of our respective cultures. This is exactly what happened to Jesus. The things Jesus says about god were considered blasphemy at the time, which is why he was killed. But he had no other way to describe it. He had not heard about the Tao, or Buddhism, he was limited to the philosophies of the near east.

But when you actually accept Him into your heart there is an indescribable feeling of peace. I presume you are an atheist. You haven't felt it yet. Trust me man its like spiritual ecstacy.
I am technically an atheist in that I don't personify this experience, but I did have it. It was in the context of meditation that I felt the ecstasy you refer to. It was the most profound experience of my life. The feeling of myself as a separate thinker enclosed in a bag of skin melted away. I like to explain it in terms of eastern philosophies, but if I had to use the language of Christianity, I would say that everything was revealed as God, including what I used to think of as me, and it was all filled with the presence of devine love. Worry dissolved, empathy became obvious, not a moral virtue that we have to follow, the gospel was personified in me, and it was very good news indeed. I feel that this peace is mans natural state, and the reason most people don't feel it, is because modern culture depends on selfish concern, emphasis on the personal ego, so that we'll worry about things and thus support governmental authority, and we will feel inadequate so we will buy things.

I say make it my habit to sign posts "Yours in Christ" because it reminds me to check and make sure everything I say is out of love and encouragement, never hate. Just so that I can portray his love in the best, most accurate way I can. It's like having Jesus himself read over what I write, make sure it is truth, and then send it.
This is not what Jesus taught. I you really loved, the no checking would be required. He said something like, if you just think about commiting sin, then you have already sinned. It doesn't mean you should be punished, its just a guidepost to let you know that your real revelation is still forthcoming. We don't need to state the obvious, we don't need to worship God as a separate thing, how rediculous!

I know it sounds ridiculous to you. I dont blame you. It sounded dumb to me too. Until I got to know him.Mystical experience always sounds vague and silly, because our language requires us to chop up meaning, and send it across to another brain where it then gets reassembled; something is always lost in this process.

Think about it, what would you do if you were God? You would know everything before it happened, and it would get very boring. Eventually, you would wish yourself a little surprise, and you would find yourself here, as a human being, participating in an internet discussion group, typing messages to other humans about the mystery that confronts us.

Let's see if Noahs flood passes as gods love.

God is dissapointed with man and therefore decides to kill them off except for one family. So Noah and his family and a pair of all animals get on board the ark and the rain starts.

After while the waters start rising people are getting scared, they are heading for high ground and so do the animals. The waters keep rising many people and animals are now at the highest land peaks scared out of their minds. Mothers clutching their babies, old folks who can not compete with the young ones being stepped over by the strong ones, animals fighting with man over the last piece of land, and the waters keep rising till ther's no more land and the last of the strongest finally lets go and sinks into the watery abyss.


And god says this is good, I liked the part where those poor mothers were holding their infants up over the water hoping for some miracle to save them haha.
And did you get a load of those elephants trying to climb those hills, that cracked me up.

Hey pal what human in his right mind would accept a sadistic and incompetent god?

Why rain for 40 days/nights when he can snap his fingers and make everybody dissapear? No blood, no suffering, no mess without killing all the animals and children, why the torture?

i dont want to get to involved with this thread becasue im in other ones and i dont have time for all these threads but i would just like to point out that Noah was a messanger from God and telling people to follow Gods' commands and todo rightoues things and get away from all of the barbaric and unlawful acts they were doing. all the rightoues people who did follow God's commands and believd in God and wanted to do reightoues things were saved becasue they went on the boat those who didn't drowned and they were the people who refused to do reightoues things and who disobeyed God.

You dont get it. Why would an omnipotent God be so sloppy? Why did he have to kill all the animals(but a few) along with man? Were the animals sinful as well? Also the method that God used, the 40 day flood is an excrutiating slow method of death. Only a sadist would chose a method like that. A loving God my ass.

So why would an omnipotent and self-sufficient God create us knowing we would fall?

think of it this way:

Say you and your wife are one person who live in an age where technology allows you to do practically anything (represents God). You decide one day to have a child. There is surgery available that can put a chip into your child's brain that will make him/her love you, do everything right, and be an absolutely perfect person. But how much more valuable is a relationship with an intelligent being, aware of good and evil, who wants to be with you, who loves you? Much more. That is why God created us. Keep in mind that everything except God has to have an equal opposite to exist.


Now think about this:

You make a miniature figure of yourself out of clay and you love it. You're very proud of it. Then it jumps up and says to you, "You don't exist! You're just an excuse early clay figures came up with to explain stuff! You are a bunch of crap! You don't have any power over me. I made you up!"

God, being perfectly loving, would be crushed. He always is when we say things like that. But he just loves you all the more in hopes that you will believe in him.

But what would YOU do? You'd most likely say, "Believe THIS, bitch!" and crush him with a sledgehammer. It's human nature. But since the penalty of sin is death, spiritual, eternal death, God can and will occasionally remind us that he is in control. The flood was just on a higher scale.

Yours in Christ,

Kevin

But what would YOU do? You'd most likely say, "Believe THIS, bitch!" and crush him with a sledgehammer. It's human nature. But since the penalty of sin is death, spiritual, eternal death, God can and will occasionally remind us that he is in control. The flood was just on a higher scale.


A few problems with your analogy:

You cast the hypothetical: "What if you were God?" This is already fairly loaded, but you go further by asking what OUR reaction might be to our creation denying our existence. Then, you say we would likely crush them because it's "human nature." Well, since when is God burdened by human nature? This once again harkens back to the notion of an anthropomorphic god. Christians are brave enough to advance the idea of a perfect, omnipotent god, but they rarely have the courage to back that conviction up; they fall back on "human" descriptions of god (e.g., "vengeful," "angry," etc.). Perfect or fallible - which is it?

Let's assume he is infallible (i.e., incapable of imperfect human-type reactions). If God is perfect and in a sense untouchable (and by that, I mean niether us nor any other spiritual entity could effectively "defeat" him), then the truth is: God is never in danger. God has nothing to fear from anyone, correct? Then the question arises: why does God worry so much about us? Because he loves us? If it was that simple, why does God react so violently (overkill anyone?) to rather trivial crimes on earth?

To say that God had to kill often because he was so offended by his own creation disbelieving in him implies God suffers from a rather uneasy vanity (another imperfect human trait). If I were God (again, an unwieldy hypothetical), why would I have to punish large numbers of innocent though perhaps misguided people and animals to prove my point? Why is some holy sacrifice necessary to reconnect with my creation? If I'm God and I set the rules, then any sacrifice I require is totally my perogative; I could just as easily set different rules, laugh off humanity's mistakes, and go about my business. The conclusion is inescapable -- the Christian God is cruel out of no obligation (after all, he's God and answers to no one) but simply because he wants to be.

Josh

It's just a ride. - Bill Hicks

>>You make a miniature figure of yourself out of clay and you love it. You're very proud of it. Then it jumps up and says to you, "You don't exist! You're just an excuse early clay figures came up with to explain stuff! You are a bunch of crap! You don't have any power over me. I made you up!"<<


Do you really think that we would be saying that to god if he was standing there in front of us? The problem with scripture is that it is only words on paper. That's like saying you have to believe in santa claus because someone has written about him. God should know that words are not enough to satisfy us that he exists. He created our skeptical nature as well as our sense of logic so he should understand why it is so hard to believe in him with just only words to go by.

The violence in the bible is not only restricted to the OT, it is also in the NT:

''Jesus curses [the inhabitants of] three cities who were not sufficiently impressed with his great works.'' MATTHEW 11:21-24

". . . but those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." Luke 19:27

http://www.evilbible.com

JustAsRide. It's implicit in the natural order of things since our creation. Those who do not believe, do not worship God but that which are not God, have chosen hell. If they continue in their choice, then they are in hell. Thus, God requires sacrifice, not because he needs, but because of our need. To further our love for God, we must do actions requiring this love. Therefore, sacrifice is required because love is not only defined by action but grows by action.

JustAsRide. It's implicit in the natural order of things since our creation. Those who do not believe, do not worship God but that which are not God, have chosen hell. If they continue in their choice, then they are in hell. Thus, God requires sacrifice, not because he needs, but because of our need. To further our love for God, we must do actions requiring this love. Therefore, sacrifice is required because love is not only defined by action but grows by action.

Well, if it's "implicit in the natural order," why didn't God create a different "natural order"? The Bible, especially early OT, does not give the impression that sacrifices (I'm talking about human, animal, and blood sacrifices -- not simply having to do something difficult) were somehow required by or for men. (Does God set the rules of engagement or not?) Animal sacrifices and the like were demanded (something many other pagan gods did) for the ostensible purpose of appeasing some angry spirit, giving an offering, or restarting some divine connection by way of blood. Now, these requirements - this system - was set up by God, not us. Was it "our need" that made these sacrifices necessary? How?

People can create things that run on different principles - cars that run on gas or electricity for instance. But we are bound by the laws of physics, chemistry, etc. This system of sin/sacrifice/redemption must have been set up by God, indeed chosen, from an infinite number of possibilities. If it was not, that implies that God was somehow confined, restricted to a set of possibilities. And therefore God is not all-powerful but bound by some outside natural law over which he has no control.

By the way, if actions are what is truly important, then is belief really the heaven/hell determiner? Gandhi did great things without resorting to violence, but he did not believe in the Bible per se. Now, let's say Hitler was a Bible believer (as many sources suggest) -- should he somehow be rewarded for his belief while Gandhi is punished for his unbelief? Was God so offended by Gandhi's misguided spirituality that he was willing to overlook the things he accomplished?

If that's how God works, I'd rather spend eternity in hell with Gandhi, Lenny Bruce, and Lao-Tzu than in heaven with Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and Benny Hinn.

Josh

It's just a ride. - Bill Hicks

Does anybody know when is the first reference of hell in the bible?

Are all versions the same or do they differ in definition?

Well, if it's "implicit in the natural order," why didn't God create a different "natural order"?

This is what hell is, a place where God is not worshiped but scorned. To say that those who refuse to worship God are in hell is only an affirmation of the meaning of hell.


The Bible, especially early OT, does not give the impression that sacrifices (I'm talking about human, animal, and blood sacrifices -- not simply having to do something difficult) were somehow required by or for men.

Isaiah and other passages says that God does not require sacrifice but obedience.


(Does God set the rules of engagement or not?) Animal sacrifices and the like were demanded (something many other pagan gods did) for the ostensible purpose of appeasing some angry spirit, giving an offering, or restarting some divine connection by way of blood. Now, these requirements - this system - was set up by God, not us. Was it "our need" that made these sacrifices necessary? How?

I'm not sure what you mean. If worship of only God is central to the love of God, then mankind must leave the things of the world, leading then to sacrifice of some sorts.


If it was not, that implies that God was somehow confined, restricted to a set of possibilities. And therefore God is not all-powerful but bound by some outside natural law over which he has no control.

God, his very being, is good. All of the possibilities that are evil must be rejected.


By the way, if actions are what is truly important, then is belief really the heaven/hell determiner? Gandhi did great things without resorting to violence, but he did not believe in the Bible per se.

Yes, but John's notion of belief is not the rational type of belief typically used. It's more of having knowledge of good, doing good since one believes in good.


Now, let's say Hitler was a Bible believer (as many sources suggest) -- should he somehow be rewarded for his belief while Gandhi is punished for his unbelief?

Hitler was not a "bible believer." While in his younger years he was a Catholic, in his later years he believed in mystical religion of sorts. In his writings in "table talk" he makes a couple of off-hand comments to the effect that Paul was the anti-christ that distorted Jesus' true message and Chrisitanity must die a slow death, but he would be unfortunate to see it.


Was God so offended by Gandhi's misguided spirituality that he was willing to overlook the things he accomplished?

I think Ghandhi could be considered to have belief in God since he managed to good. Because it's written that no one is good but God, Ghandhi, if he was truly doing good, communicated with God's grace somehow. Thus, its entirely possible that Ghandi may have been sent to purgatory or heaven.


If that's how God works, I'd rather spend eternity in hell with Gandhi, Lenny Bruce, and Lao-Tzu than in heaven with Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and Benny Hinn.

What makes you so certain that Pat Robertson, Jery Falwell, and Benny Hinn believe in God. Of note, the only one I think is actually trying is Pat Robertson, though I don't believe everything he says.

[QUOTE=okinrus]Hitler was not a "bible believer." While in his younger years he was a Catholic, in his later years he believed in mystical religion of sorts.
*************
M*W: Hitler's "mystical religion" was most likely a manifestation of his schizophrenia. In psychiatric terms today, it's called "magical thinking."
*************
In his writings in "table talk" he makes a couple of off-hand comments to the effect that Paul was the anti-christ that distorted Jesus' true message and Chrisitanity must die a slow death, but he would be unfortunate to see it.
*************
M*W: I resent this assumption, okinrus. How long have you known me by now? I'm the one who first said Paul was the antichrist, and here you're crediting Hitler for saying it!

As we know, Hitler chose to end his life suddenly, so, no he was unfortunate to see the beginning of Christianity's decline. He's been gone nearly 60 years now, and in these past 60 years, Christianity has experienced a serious decline.

M*W: Hitler's "mystical religion" was most likely a manifestation of his schizophrenia. In psychiatric terms today, it's called "magical thinking."

First, I don't believe that Hitler was schizophrenia but communicating with demons. His association with Jews raping blond Aryian women seems to suggest that there were sexual overtones as well.


M*W: I resent this assumption, okinrus. How long have you known me by now? I'm the one who first said Paul was the antichrist, and here you're crediting Hitler for saying it!

Yes, you're not the only one either. Another person who even managed to stay Catholic believes that Paul was the antichrist. Perhaps he came to this conclusion before you since he claims a revelation of it.

Since Paul was distinctivley a Jew, Hitler could not accept his writings as authoriative.


As we know, Hitler chose to end his life suddenly, so, no he was unfortunate to see the beginning of Christianity's decline. He's been gone nearly 60 years now, and in these past 60 years, Christianity has experienced a serious decline.

I don't believe so. Christianity is growing in new areas, such as Africa, but declining in places like Europe.

This is what hell is, a place where God is not worshiped but scorned. To say that those who refuse to worship God are in hell is only an affirmation of the meaning of hell.

Um, that did nothing to answer my question. I'm asking why God created a "natural" system that required blood sacrifices and strange rites. If God is all-powerful, he could have created any system he wanted - sacrifices or no.


Isaiah and other passages says that God does not require sacrifice but obedience.

Yes and other verses make reference to physical sacrifices, so your argument is, well, without merit. People in the Old Testament sacrificed animals because God instructed them to do so. Some illustrations include Abel (Gen. 4:4; Heb. 11:4), Noah (Gen. 8:20-21) and Abraham (Gen. 22:12-14). When God gave the nation of Israel a distinct law at Mount Sinai, it contained a great deal of instruction about animal sacrifices (see Exo. 29:38-46; the book of Leviticus).


I'm not sure what you mean. If worship of only God is central to the love of God, then mankind must leave the things of the world, leading then to sacrifice of some sorts.

I'm talking about physical sacrifices (animals and humans), not just doing something unpleasant for a cause.


God, his very being, is good. All of the possibilities that are evil must be rejected.

Hmmm. That had absolutely nothing to do with anything. I'm asking: Are there some rules God must follow (meaning he is not all-powerful), or does he set the rules (in which case, he could have created a different system that did not require animal and human sacrifices)?



Hitler was not a "bible believer." While in his younger years he was a Catholic, in his later years he believed in mystical religion of sorts. In his writings in "table talk" he makes a couple of off-hand comments to the effect that Paul was the anti-christ that distorted Jesus' true message and Chrisitanity must die a slow death, but he would be unfortunate to see it.

I was using him as an example. Pick any Christian who has acted horribly (there are plenty to choose from). The question still stands.


I think Ghandhi could be considered to have belief in God since he managed to good. Because it's written that no one is good but God, Ghandhi, if he was truly doing good, communicated with God's grace somehow. Thus, its entirely possible that Ghandi may have been sent to purgatory or heaven.

Nothing in the Bible suggests that a nonbeliever, no matter how "good," is saved. Heaven or hell is determined by whether a person believes (puts his/her trust) in Christ alone to save them (John 3:16, 36, etc.).

What makes you so certain that Pat Robertson, Jery Falwell, and Benny Hinn believe in God. Of note, the only one I think is actually trying is Pat Robertson, though I don't believe everything he says.

Well, let's see. They have spent their lives "converting" people to Christianity. They may be cynical liars, certainly, but so could everybody. I'm pointing out that belief in God (or public admission of belief in God) should not gain anyone points in the afterlife. Clearly, Christians are a fairly diverse lot - some stress the "love thy neighbor" passages, some stress the "homosexuals are evil" passages. But they can all believe in God. And all of them can back up their conclusions. Sadly, the Bible provides enough ammunition for all sides.

I was simply saying that the kind of people I would want to spend eternity with are the thoughtful, reasonable, exciting, funny, irreverent, creative people -- not the dogmatic, rulebook people who are afraid to entertain even a single independent, un-telegraphed thought for fear they will be punished by an invisible dude in the sky.

Josh

It's just a ride. - Bill Hicks

Okay, how "wicked" could those people have been? How about killing their own sons and daughters by burning them in sacrifices to their gods

"You shall not behave thus toward the LORD your God, for every abominable act which the LORD hates they have done for their gods; for they even burn their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods. (Deuteronomy 12:31)

The wickedness of these people is confirmed in other verses of the Bible.3 So we see that these people are not quite as innocent as the atheists would like you to believe. Then again, maybe those atheists believe that killing your children is not all bad


Fire sure is a nasty way to die, (from the looks of it- can't say i've ever tried it out before). However Kevin, these evil bastards burning their sons to death because their gods commanded it, would be no different... Let's all turn to Deut 21:18. In this passage, god tells people that if their son is rebellious, they should stone him to death. While I most certainly am not in the position to be stating whether burning or countless blows to the head with a sharp rock hurt more, it does go to show the biblical god/humans are as guilty of sin as these other gods/humans.

You go so far as to try and accuse atheists of thinking killing children is not bad, when it is in fact your god who commanded it. Us atheists don't have a giant sky guy telling us to slaughter our kids.

Um, that did nothing to answer my question. I'm asking why God created a "natural" system that required blood sacrifices and strange rites. If God is all-powerful, he could have created any system he wanted - sacrifices or no.

I'm not sure where you're going with this. I think I've been quite clear that something needs to be sacrificed. After the fall material things are given overemphasis which requires giving up material things. Now, in old testament times it was the livestock, grain, and food that was most valued so the people who sought to give everything to God would sacrifice these things, and while God could envision a world where bread, livestock, and food are not valued, he was also portending the final sacrifice he would give to mankind.


Yes and other verses make reference to physical sacrifices, so your argument is, well, without merit. People in the Old Testament sacrificed animals because God instructed them to do so. Some illustrations include Abel (Gen. 4:4; Heb. 11:4), Noah (Gen. 8:20-21) and Abraham (Gen. 22:12-14). When God gave the nation of Israel a distinct law at Mount Sinai, it contained a great deal of instruction about animal sacrifices (see Exo. 29:38-46; the book of Leviticus

Yes, but the Law of Moses only officialized prior sacrifices done in the fields. In this view, God was attempting to created an heirachy of priest, crimes would be forgiven by the community, as sacrifices were done by the community. Nevertheless, rarely does God command a sacrifice. Although there's a few places where angels tell someone to sacrifice,rarely does God demand sacrifce since it would limit the grace received by the choice to do good.

God usually demands us to do good without telling us what good we are to accomplish; otherwise, it would appear that good is limited and those within Christ do not have freedom.


Hmmm. That had absolutely nothing to do with anything. I'm asking: Are there some rules God must follow (meaning he is not all-powerful), or does he set the rules (in which case, he could have created a different system that did not require animal and human sacrifices)?

Well, you're assumption that God could choose a different path assumes that God does not know the full future. You're already off the track of mainstream Christian theology. On the other hand, since I usually operate in the mode that God does not know the full future, I will try to answer your question. It would seem that God is not only all-powerful but also is good. He may swear by himself, knowing that his word will be kept. So the conventual notion of an all-powerful God is just that. It does not mean that God will do everything that we think he can do, only that which is good may be done.


Nothing in the Bible suggests that a nonbeliever, no matter how "good," is saved. Heaven or hell is determined by whether a person believes (puts his/her trust) in Christ alone to save them (John 3:16, 36, etc.).

The bible does not say that every one who does not believe will surely go to hell. In fact, since Christ said at the end of John to call anyone who loves others a disciple of Him, it would appear that the exact opposite of what you say. Besides, rational belief alone inevitably gains you nothing, since its entirely physical sight.


Well, let's see. They have spent their lives "converting" people to Christianity. They may be cynical liars, certainly, but so could everybody. I'm pointing out that belief in God (or public admission of belief in God) should not gain anyone points in the afterlife.

Belief in God carrries one through evil. If God's judgement was entirely on works, then belief would be just as important since no one can do good without belief in God. For example, how can feeding the poor be good unless if the motive behind feeding the poor is good? Thus, if the motive is hypocrisy, to distort the public, feeding the poor is wicked.


Clearly, Christians are a fairly diverse lot - some stress the "love thy neighbor" passages, some stress the "homosexuals are evil" passages. But they can all believe in God. And all of them can back up their conclusions. Sadly, the Bible provides enough ammunition for both sides.

I don't believe in the bible alone. I really don't know where you're going with this, but practically any book can be used for evil.

I'm not sure where you're going with this. I think I've been quite clear that something needs to be sacrificed. After the fall material things are given overemphasis which requires giving up material things. Now, in old testament times it was the livestock, grain, and food that was most valued so the people who sought to give everything to God would sacrifice these things, and while God could envision a world where bread, livestock, and food are not valued, he was also portending the final sacrifice he would give to mankind.

Right. And the question is: WHY does "something need to be sacrificed" if not because God set up the system in such a way that that is required?


Yes, but the Law of Moses only officialized prior sacrifices done in the fields. In this view, God was attempting to created an heirachy of priest, crimes would be forgiven by the community, as sacrifices were done by the community. Nevertheless, rarely does God command a sacrifice. Although there's a few places where angels tell someone to sacrifice,rarely does God demand sacrifce since it would limit the grace received by the choice to do good.

Saying God "rarely" asked for sacrifices does not answer my question: why are they required at all? If God had a choice and can do anything, why did he set thing up this way - requiring violent sacrements to atone for wrongdoing? He could just as easily have made it so that our sins could be absolved without killing animals, right?


God usually demands us to do good without telling us what good we are to accomplish; otherwise, it would appear that good is limited and those within Christ do not have freedom.

I'm not talking about some abstract idea of good. I'm talking about God himself. Is he limited in what he can do, or is he not? My point in asking this is very simple.

The Bible says God required blood sacrifices in order to achieve certain ends.

Now, I'm wondering why these had to exist at all. There are two possibilities:

1. God HAD to require sacrifices because he is bound by some outside set of rules. (This would mean God is not all-powerful.)

2. God did not have to require sacrifices. (This means sacrifices were not really absolutely necessary - but simply a thing God chose to demand.)


So the conventual notion of an all-powerful God is just that. It does not mean that God will do everything that we think he can do, only that which is good may be done.

Then God is bound by goodness, huh? So, in theory then, God cannot do anything outside of what his nature permits him to do. This means he is limited by his nature (good).


The bible does not say that every one who does not believe will surely go to hell. In fact, since Christ said at the end of John to call anyone who loves others a disciple of Him, it would appear that the exact opposite of what you say. Besides, rational belief alone inevitably gains you nothing, since its entirely physical sight.

"I am the Way, the Truth, and the Light, and no one comes to the Father but through me." - The Son of God

If the Bible did not suggest that nonbelievers go to hell, then dare I say we might not have suffered through centuries of blistering intolerance and violent disagreement. Christians would look around and see people of different faiths, doing good, loving each other, and not feel any need to convert them, for they are already saved.

Exclusivity of salvation is the hallmark of Christianity (otherwise, why would Christ even need to come - all we'd need to know is: be good) . It's all well and fine if you want to interpret away lines that contradict your little theory that nonbelievers can get to heaven, but the fact remains, the Bible is brimming with verses directed against nonbelievers of every stripe. Salvation for nonbelievers is a nice thought, but there is little Biblical evidence for it.


Belief in God carrries one through evil. If God's judgement was entirely on works, then belief would be just as important since no one can do good without belief in God. For example, how can feeding the poor be good unless if the motive behind feeding the poor is good? Thus, if the motive is hypocrisy, to distort the public, feeding the poor is wicked.

If you equate God with "good," that might work, but I'm afraid that's not what the Bible suggests - otherwise, we'd just have a bunch of verses about doing good and nothing more. Instead we have a lot of "believe in me or die" kind of stuff.

Belief in good is not the same as belief in the Christian god. If it helps you to believe that, great, but I do good things for their own sake (not for some eternal reward). With your system, anyone who believes in "good" (a rather nebulous term) is really a Christian. Well, what if I reject the Bible for all its violence and start believing that Taoism represents good, and I continue to do "good" things? Am I still doing them for God, even though I have rejected him? What if the Christian community feels cursing is wrong but I feel it is good? Is God on both sides, since he is "good"? Your theory is far too subjective.


I don't believe in the bible alone. I really don't know where you're going with this, but practically any book can be used for evil.

Figures. I was only trying to point out that belief in God is no great indicator of how someone will act, whether good or bad. You suggested that belief in God was essential. So, my question question was: why does God even give a shit whether people believe in him or not?

Josh

It's just a ride. - Bill Hicks

Right. And the question is: WHY does "something need to be sacrificed" if not because God set up the system in such a way that that is required?



Then God is bound by goodness, huh? So, in theory then, God cannot do anything outside of what his nature permits him to do. This means he is limited by his nature (good).

Yes, this is the traditional understanding of an all-powerful God, I believe.


Saying God "rarely" asked for sacrifices does not answer my question: why are they required at all? If God had a choice and can do anything, why did he set thing up this way - requiring violent sacrements to atone for wrongdoing? He could just as easily have made it so that our sins could be absolved without killing animals, right?

He did. Although Hebrews says that God requires blood sacrifice, it is believed that passage refers to Jewish sect. It does not refer to the entire Torah where its clear that sins may be forgiven by prayer and fasting without the shedding of blood. I would view the shedding of animals not necessary but advantageous.

There are really a number of reasons why God allowed the Isrealites to sacrifice to Him. First, God is manifesting the spiritual signficance of sin in that all sin causes death as said by Paul. Thus, the natural order of sacrifice seems to be implicit within the definition of sin. Second, since these types of sacrifices were prevalent in the pagan world, it may have been to counter pagan influences. Third, since only God gives life, it prepared for His Son's sacrifice.


Exclusivity of salvation is the hallmark of Christianity (otherwise, why would Christ even need to come - all we'd need to know is: be good) .

The point I'm making is you cannot be good without God's grace. Yet God's grace must overcome evil completely, which at the end is death. But it's entirely possible for someone to be ignorant of this reality but still receive God's grace. Nor, for that matter, do I think five year olds will go to hell if they do not understand.



Figures. I was only trying to point out that belief in God is no great indicator of how someone will act, whether good or bad. You suggested that belief in God was essential. So, my question question was: why does God even give a shit whether people believe in him or not?

Well, sort of. An action alone is almost never good since the intention of the action is what matters. However, the intention if good, is formed by the belief in God who is the source of all goodness.

rarely does God command a sacrifice. Although there's a few places where angels tell someone to sacrifice,rarely does God demand sacrifce since it would limit the grace received by the choice to do good.

Rarely? It seems to play the majority part of day to day life. Let us not forget god's commands concerning:

the burnt offering, the sin offering, the guilt offering, the ordination offering and the fellowship offering.

Which had to be conducted constantly using only perfect animals. Any animal that had a defect - ranging from deformity to bruised testicles - would not be accepted by god.

In Numbers we see the sacrifices at the dedication of the tabernacle, which was over a period of twelve days. The sacrifices made to god within those twelve days are listed as:

burnt offering: 12 bulls, 12 rams, 12 male lambs.
sin offering: 12 male goats
fellowship offering: 24 oxen, 60 rams, 60 male goats, and 60 male lambs.

The total = 252 sacrificed animals over a period of 12 days which = 21 animals per day

You call this "rare"?? Of course, lest we forget, the priests got a healthy profit out of the whole thing... why is that not surprising?

Let's also not forget that during this time the Israelites were not eating the meat but were fed nothing but manna by god. Eventually they tired of eating manna, (and god would know the inherent problems with a diet consisting of nothing but the same food), so they asked for some meat.

Moses was a smart old man, and after being pestered by the people he went to speak to god. He raised a very valid question:

Numbers 11:22 "..would they have enough if flocks and herds were slaughtered for them?"

You see, Moses was being sarcastic here, and with good cause. All these animals, (cmon 21 a day is obscene), being slaughtered for god, while the men couldn't eat any but were forced to consume nothing but manna.

So god relented and said he would feed them meat for one month until they hated it. But you see... god lied - he had a much more sinister plan up his sleeve....

god bought quail in from the sea.. and not just a few quail but completely covering the ground as far as a days walk in any direction, three feet deep!!!

The people must have been astonished.. So they got some of these quail and cooked them.. Here comes the twist in the story....

While the meat was still between their teeth, god got angry and struck them all with severe plague.

Summary

god forces people to eat manna constantly while he commands that countless amount of livestock be sacrificed to him. The people ask for some meat - so he gives them some - but before allowing them to eat it, he kills them all.

All due respect, but the guy's a wanker.

Yes, this is the traditional understanding of an all-powerful God, I believe.

Then the "traditional" understanding of an all-powerful god is not all-powerful at all.


I would view the shedding of animals not necessary but advantageous.

All right, we're slowly chipping away at this thing. We've gone from sacrifices were god-ordered and necessary for man to commune with god, to God only rarely ordered sacrifices, to sacrifices being "not necessary" but "advantageous." At this rate, we'll be done with sacrifices altogether by the end of the night. ;)

I'm not arguing about the specifics of animal sacrifices, then when, where, who, and hows.... I'm asking why they were at all necessary in the first place. Clearly, they were ONLY needed because God chose to create a system of atonement that, for some unknown reason, included the barbaric killing of animals for no real reason whatsoever, except to some abstract spiritual need. Why couldn't God have made it so sin could be dealt with via non-animal-slaughtering methods? Because he was bound by his "good" nature? God is one confusing, obtuse fellow indeed.

the natural order of sacrifice seems to be implicit within the definition of sin. Second, since these types of sacrifices were prevalent in the pagan world, it may have been to counter pagan influences. Third, since only God gives life, it prepared for His Son's sacrifice.

Am I talking to the wall here? You can go and on about the "natural order" and the "preparing" for Jesus' sacrifice, yadda, yadda, yadda. I'm saying, if God were all-powerful, he wouldn't HAVE to sacrifice anything to acheive some goal. If he can wave his hand and create something from nothing, why would the redemption of mankind require blood sacrifices? I'm not interested in definitions of "sin" and what they require. I'm asking a larger question: Who, if not God, decided on the definition? And by extension, who, if not God, selected this barbaric system to be the "natural" order you speak of?


The point I'm making is you cannot be good without God's grace. Yet God's grace must overcome evil completely, which at the end is death. But it's entirely possible for someone to be ignorant of this reality but still receive God's grace. Nor, for that matter, do I think five year olds will go to hell if they do not understand.

Well, that's very nice of you. I wish your fellow Christians would follow your lead. Sadly, many do not.

I heard a preacher in Manhattan once say, "It isn't important whether you believe in God, but whether God believes in you." I liked that quote a lot, and it echoes what you said about "God's grace." And I have no trouble entertaining that as a possibility.

I suppose my only problem is that the Bible does not suggest that those who do "good" but do not believe get any reward other than eternal hellfire. One can interpret it differently (in a more liberal, selective way) if one chooses, but I'm afraid that's one of those ideas that crept in solely because modern Christians simply have a hard time believing good nonbelievers are in hell. Not because the Bible suggests it.


Well, sort of. An action alone is almost never good since the intention of the action is what matters. However, the intention if good, is formed by the belief in God who is the source of all goodness.

Interesting. You Christians are all so different, I must say. I never know what you'll say!

Of course, Osama bin Laden thinks he doing "good" too, but I doubt we would agree that he is truly receiving those "good" intentions from God.

To each his own, I suppose.

Josh

It's just a ride. - Bill Hicks

Then the "traditional" understanding of an all-powerful god is not all-powerful at all.

Omnipotence usually does not mean God can do contradictions, nor does it rule out the posibilitiy of God having other attributes.



Clearly, they were ONLY needed because God chose to create a system of atonement that, for some unknown reason, included the barbaric killing of animals for no real reason whatsoever, except to some abstract spiritual need.

The spiritual need will always take precidence of any natural need.


Why couldn't God have made it so sin could be dealt with via non-animal-slaughtering methods? Because he was bound by his "good" nature? God is one confusing, obtuse fellow indeed.

He did. Most sects of Jews do not sacrifice animals simply because there is no command in the Torah that requires the sacrifice of animals for forgiveness.


I'm saying, if God were all-powerful, he wouldn't HAVE to sacrifice anything to acheive some goal. If he can wave his hand and create something from nothing, why would the redemption of mankind require blood sacrifices?

I've thought about it and I think evil must be given a fair chance to destroy in order to be defeated. Likewise, in order for a baseball team to win a game they must actually play the game with no handicaps.


I'm not interested in definitions of "sin" and what they require. I'm asking a larger question: Who, if not God, decided on the definition? And by extension, who, if not God, selected this barbaric system to be the "natural" order you speak of?

The definition of sin is the absence of God. I'm uncertain how you can call animal sacrifice barbaric without a given basis. Are you a vegetarian? Without God your view of what is barbaric is completely relative. It seems that it was man's choice since animals were his prized possessions.


I suppose my only problem is that the Bible does not suggest that those who do "good" but do not believe get any reward other than eternal hellfire. One can interpret it differently (in a more liberal, selective way) if one chooses, but I'm afraid that's one of those ideas that crept in solely because modern Christians simply have a hard time believing good nonbelievers are in hell. Not because the Bible suggests it.

In light of history, I would view the fire-and-brimstone teaching relatively modern, beginning in full swing perhaps at the 1st awakening. Of course, there are plenty of apocryphia accounts and writings about hell, including Dante's inferno. But it does not seem to be used in instruction.

The view of sola-scriptura inevitably worsened the problem since now it was the individual interpreting scriptures. However, there is plenty in the Bible that suggests even non-christians could be saved, not the least of which is the belief that God is all-power.

Luke has a story of the servants and some knew the master's will and some did not. The servant who disobeyed not knowing his master's will was given a light beating. It's apparent that God's justice will be fair. I don't think this is modern idea.

In fact, Justin Marytr struggled with the same question, also answering why the sacrifices were given to the Jews. http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-01/anf01-48.htm#P4159_812391
<blockquote>
And Trypho remarked, "What is this you say? that none of us shall inherit anything on the holy mountain of God? "
And I replied, "I do not say so; but those who have persecuted and do persecute Christ, if they do not repent, shall not inherit anything on the holy mountain. But the Gentiles, who have believed on Him, and have repented of the sins which they have committed, they shall receive the inheritance along with the patriarchs and the prophets, and the just men who are descended from Jacob, even although they neither keep the Sabbath, nor are circumcised, nor observe the feasts. Assuredly they shall receive the holy inheritance of God. For God speaks by Isaiah thus: `I, the Lord God, have called Thee in righteousness, and will hold Thine hand, and will strengthen Thee; and I have given Thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles, to open the eyes of the blind, to bring out them that are bound from the chains, and those who sit in darkness from the prison-house.'66 And again: `Lift up a standard67 for the people; for, lo, the Lord has made it heard unto the end of the earth. Say ye to the daughters of Zion, Behold, thy Saviour has come; having His reward, and His work before His face: and He shall call it a holy nation, redeemed by the Lord. And thou shalt be called a city sought out, and not forsaken. Who is this that cometh from Edom? in red garments from Bosor? This that is beautiful in apparel, going up with great strength? I speak righteousness, and the judgment of salvation. Why are Thy garments red, and Thine apparel as from the trodden wine-press? Thou art full of the trodden grape. I have trodden the wine-press all alone, and of the people there is no man with Me; and I have trampled them in fury, and crushed them to the ground, and spilled their blood on the earth. For the day of retribution has come upon them, and the year of redemption is present. And I looked, and there was none to help; and I considered, and none assisted: and My arm delivered; and My fury came on them, and I trampled them in My fury, and spilled their blood on the earth.'"68 </blockquote>