Is God A Moral Monster?

[Winchester]

The question was answered thousands of years ago. I've already pointed this out to no avail.

[sixpence]

So I think basically you want someone to concede that if someone with no background info or preconcieved notions about God were to read the Old Testament they would conclude that this God were a monster (judging by human moral standards)? If that is what you are looking for, then I would agree with you that some people would come to that conclusion.

However, what is the point? It is still a mystery to me why: 1. you want to insist on judging God by human standards and 2. you insist that the Old Testament not be subject to any type of "interpretation" but only read in a word for word literal sense, not taking into account any type of poetic license or consulting any sources of relevant background material to put things into context and 3. you imagine that you have the ability to comprehend to the mind of God (let alone Judge it). (See Isaiah 55:8-99)

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='Mr.Cat' timestamp='1316821616' post='2309053']
But the outrageous lack of coherent, reasonable, or logical rebuttal to this kind of accusation is a bit surprising.


[/quote]
I always find it interesting, how many people when attacking others, often use a description which fits themselves perfectly. You obviously are not aware of the fact that you are not able to interpret what posters here are saying while other readers can, so it is your defect not the other posters. Also your posts are mostly incoherent. People continually respond to a post of yours and then you deny implying what you implied. Hard to argue with someone who denies anything that is not in their favour. You said you were an experienced debater. Some sad news, it doesn't show! Good debaters are clear and concise and full of win. I've yet to see you actually demonstrate any other than the fact that you think you are. I don't need to read these facts into what is written. It is evidenced by the number of people that you respond to in the same manner. Either one of two conditions exist. The problem is you or the problem is all the other posters. Mr Spock says that the performance of the many outweighs the performance of the one. Your other defect which is not consistent with good debaters is the fact that you cannot let a poster leave the conversation without a parting last shot. So therefore not being an experienced debater I came back to have mine which I think is only fair. My parting shot is to point out that you may think you are winning against those that enter into the discussion, it is obvious that you are not! All your attempts to twist away from their challenges are a fail. Sorry if this seems a bit harsh, I just didn't want you to have any misconceptions about yourself. I think your ego needs a bit of a trim. I'm looking forward to seeing your claws, no doubt you will come up with some not so clever response to what I've written.

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1316836899' post='2309147']
I don't understand what the point of this thread is Mr. Cat. If you don't believe God exists at all, what are you trying to argue? That the idea of God is dangerous? That people use the idea of God to do evil things?
[/quote]
That's the whole problem here. No one seems to understand what Mr Cat is trying to say. Mr Cat thinks that it is everyone elses problem.

[MithLuin]

Nah, Mr. Cat acknowledged that he's not really trying to say anything. He's trying to stir up a hornet's nest so he can have fodder to (mis)represent in real life conversations. In other words, he's inviting us to make fools of ourselves.

And if I were an experienced debater, I would know better than to rise to such bait. However.... *grin* Fools rush in and all of that.

[quote]Yeah... your god certainly loves us to DEATH. Literally. Didn't enjoy the joke? I wonder why...[/quote]

It is true I didn't smile at that statement. Because when I hear the phrase 'God loves us to death' I immediately picture this:

[img]http://photos-d.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/58546_152033138152540_100000375639117_331663_3178610_n..jpg[/img]

How much does Jesus love us? THIS much.

But anyway, yes, the thought kinda sends a bolt to the heart that he would die for me. A reminder that I needed to go to confession (which I did ) I will die someday. I know this. It isn't a pleasant thought, of course. However, I know that the manner of my death is in God's hands, and I do trust Him with it. Whenever I am afraid of death or danger, I remind myself that God is with me...even in the valley of the shadow of death. Then His peace is with me, and I can go on despite the fear.

Being at peace is an important way of discerning good from evil.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUJX1h7rU6Q[/media]

I don't blame God for my mortality. I know that death is a flaw in creation...one that entered by our free will. Were I guiltless, I might resent that it's all Adam and Eve's fault that I'll die someday. But...I'm not. That's one reason that it's not terribly important that Adam and Eve be actual people who lived at a specific point in time...all humanity after them is fallen, and acts like it. It's...the human condition. Were I put in their place, I would likewise fail the test.

I was not saying that millions and millions of deaths was something paltry. I was saying that the death tolls being discussed here (10,000 dead - God's fault!!) were paltry compared to the total deaths of all of humanity that has gone before us. I don't think there's any point in 'blaming' God when a person dies (be it of old age, sickness, famine, an accident or even a brutal homicide). How is any of that 'God's fault?' He's God, but human death does not mean he's a murderer...or a monster.

Instead, I would be interested in knowing what God's [i]response[/i] to human death is. What does He [i]do[/i] about it? He's God - he can do anything!! And when I consider the amesome concept of resurrection from the dead...well, that is a divine answer to the question of death!

God is holy. And God is love. Whenever I do not fully understand what that means...I recognize a lack in myself.

And I am at peace with that.

[Mark of the Cross]

Amen!

In truth Death is something to relish because it is in reality a birth into a new and glorious existence. Some people just can't see that!

Edited September 24, 2011 by Mark of the Cross

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1316902180' post='2309362']

I would be interested in knowing what God's [i]response[/i] to human death is.

this
[img]http://photos-d.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/58546_152033138152540_100000375639117_331663_3178610_n..jpg[/img]
[/quote]

[AccountDeleted]

I'm not sure that death is 'a flaw in creation'. I don't know the theology behind it, and I acknowledge that original sin caused expulsion from Paradise, but I think death was God's gift to man, to end the pain and suffering of life outside Paradise. And the second gift was Jesus - who paid our debt and then promised us an eternal life with God. I certainly don't want to live forever in this mortal body - but I do look forward to the day when I can be with Jesus in Paradise. Death hurts, but living without the beatific vision hurts more. Death is rebirth into a new life, because of the death that Jesus died. So, no, death isn't a flaw in God's creation at all (to me).

[Mr.Cat]

Wow... a lot of more nonsense. If any of you decide to actually respond to what I wrote... we can continue. But... this non-discussion has become more than a bit tiring.

Mark of the Cross, lol. If you can keep making posts like that I would appreciate it.

Edited September 25, 2011 by Mr.Cat

[Winchester]

В первое время после основания [url="http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%B1%D1%83%D1%80%D0%BD"]Мельбурна[/url] большие суда не могли пройти выше по [url="http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%AF%D1%80%D1%80%D0%B0_%28%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BA%D0%B0%29"]реке Ярра[/url] и были вынуждены разгружаться в одной из бухт, после чего товары доставлялись в город и на склады по железной дороге, что было дорого и неэффективно. В [url="http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/1877_%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B4"]1877 году[/url] правительство колонии Виктория решили сделать расширить русло реки Ярры и сделать его судоходным. Автором проекта стал английский инженер [url="http://ru.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%94%D0%B6%D0%BE%D0%BD_%D0%9A%D1%83%D0%B4%D0%B8&action=edit&redlink=1"]Джон Куди[/url], который предложил построить подходящий по размерам [url="http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BB_%28%D0%B3%D0%B8%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%84%D0%B8%D1%8F%29"]канал[/url] к югу от уже имеющегося русла. Однако, со временем, когда грузовые суда стали крупнее и канал уже не мог обеспечивать должную пропускную способность, многочисленные доки переехали ближе к морю.
Из-за [url="http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D1%8F"]Великой депрессии[/url] и [url="http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B9%D0%BD%D0%B0"]Второй мировой войны[/url] развитие порта замедлилось вместе с объёмом морских перевозок, и возобновилось спустя десятилетие. В [url="http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/1956_%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B4"]1956 году[/url] был построен док Эпплтон, а в [url="http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B4"]1960 году[/url] — док Вебб в устье реки Ярра, а также док Свенсон на острове Куди (остров между руслом реки Ярра и искусственным каналом).
В [url="http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B4"]1991 году[/url] на острове Куди произошел крупным пожар, в ходе которого в атмосферу попали токсичные вещества. Общественность [url="http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D0%B2%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%8F"]Австралии[/url] потребовала от правительства переноса части портовых сооружений из окрестностей Мельбурна. В [url="http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B4"]1999 году[/url] на реконструкцию был закрыт док Виктория, в связи с его малой пропускной способностью. Кроме того, в заливе [url="http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%82-%D0%A4%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BF_%28%D0%B7%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B2%29"]Порт-Филлип[/url] начались работы по намыву искусственного острова, который будет использоваться для нужд порта.

[Mr.Cat]

Russian eh? But it's a bit off topic Winchester.

[Winchester]

[b]Henry Edwards[/b] (August 27, 1827 – June 9, 1891), known as "Harry", was an [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/England"]English-born[/url] stage actor, writer and [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entomology"]entomologist[/url] who gained fame in Australia, [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco"]San Francisco[/url] and [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City"]New York City[/url] for his theater work.
Edwards was drawn to the theater early in life, and he appeared in amateur productions in [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London"]London[/url]. After sailing to Australia, Edwards appeared professionally in [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Shakespeare"]Shakespearean[/url] plays and light comedies primarily in [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melbourne"]Melbourne[/url] and Sydney. Throughout his childhood in England and his acting career in Australia, he was greatly interested in [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insect_collecting"]collecting insects[/url], and the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Museum_Victoria"]National Museum of Victoria[/url] used the results of his Australian fieldwork as part of the genesis of their collection.
In San Francisco, Edwards was a founding member of the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohemian_Club"]Bohemian Club[/url], and a gathering in Edwards' honor was the spark which began the club's traditional summer encampment at the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohemian_Grove"]Bohemian Grove[/url].[sup][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Edwards_%28entomologist%29#cite_note-Garnett7-2"][3][/url][/sup] As well, Edwards cemented his reputation as a preeminent stage actor and theater manager. After writing a series of influential studies on [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Coast_of_the_United_States"]Pacific Coast[/url] butterflies and moths he was elected life member of the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Academy_of_Sciences"]California Academy of Sciences[/url]. Relocating eastward, a brief time spent in [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston"]Boston[/url] theater led to a connection to [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallack%27s_Theatre"]Wallack's Theatre[/url] and further renown in New York City. There, Edwards edited three volumes of the journal [i]Papilio[/i] and published a major work about the life of the butterfly.[sup][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Edwards_%28entomologist%29#cite_note-Beutenmuller-1"][2][/url][/sup] His large collection of insect specimens served as the foundation of the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Museum_of_Natural_History"]American Museum of Natural History[/url]'s butterfly and moth studies.
Edwards' wide-ranging studies and observations of insects brought him into contact with specimens not yet classified. Upon discovering previously unknown insects he would give them names, which led to a number of [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly"]butterfly[/url], [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moth"]moth[/url] and [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beetle"]beetle[/url] species bearing "Hy. Edw." (for Henry Edwards) as an attribution.[sup][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Edwards_%28entomologist%29#cite_note-Lepidopterists-3"][4][/url][/sup] From his theater interests to entomology, Edwards carried forward an appreciation of Shakespeare—in the designation of new insect species he favored female character names from Shakespeare's plays.

[MithLuin]

[quote name='Mr.Cat' timestamp='1316912654' post='2309430']
Wow... a lot of more nonsense. If any of you decide to actually respond to what I wrote... we can continue. [/quote]

But I quoted you? And addressed your post?

I'm not sure what you think constitutes a discussion.

[Winchester]

Anything that is not a non-discussion that also makes use of literary devices.

[Mr.Cat]

[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1316923297' post='2309485']But I quoted you? And addressed your post?

I'm not sure what you think constitutes a discussion.[/quote]Looking over this post... you never once quoted me. At least not directly... and at the very start of it you narrow out a very small aspect of me posting here and possibly misconstrue it for your own purposes.

A discussion would be for example... oh I don't know... for this topic? Discussing what defines a monster? Discussing if "god" had good cause to kill people like in the story of Job. Discussing if "Jesus" really had to die on a cross in order to save us? Discussing how to identify a monstrous god? If "god" was possibly a monster would it change anything for believers? If it is possible to have a "good monster"? Even discussing particular instances of violence or death in the bible?

Actually considering I didn't make the topic title, a mere discussion of the instances of violence and death in the bible would of been fine. A discussion comparing the violence of the Bible to the Koran, as mentioned in the first post, would of been fine too.

Sounded like a good discussion... too bad it never happened.

Edited September 25, 2011 by Mr.Cat