10- Because the god of Abraham sees nothing wrong with testing one of his only "worthy" creations with killing his own son. Because that god claims to be ALL-loving but shows otherwise.
9- Each of the Abrahamic Faiths' holy texts are all but holy. They are all filled with errors and contradictions in the realms of History, Science, Logic, Philosophy and Ethics. And if one is to say that the original texts were holy, then isn't it HaShem's fault that we don't have a holy text today? After all, he caused language barriers at the Tower of Babel. So these translational errors are his fault. See number 7.
8- What is wrong with wanting to know the difference between Good and Evil? Adam and Eve were not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Wouldn't that knowledge save a lot of shitty wars and the destruction of cities? What is wrong with wanting to know?
7- According to Judaism, Islam and Christianity, the translation of their holy texts is very important. There are extremely important minute details within said texts that get lost in translation. How is that fair? Wasn't it HaShem who supposedly divided all tongues and peoples at the Tower of Babel? Did I build a fucking tower to the heavens? No. And that in itself is wicked, causing confusion amongst all the people. Making ONE PEOPLE, ONE TONGUE many. Genesis 11 clearly states that HaShem caused confusion. But I thought that HaShem wasn't a god of confusion? Hmmm. Which one is it?
6- How could HaShem not only promote war, but destroy people himself? How is that ALL-loving? When Abram disobeyed HaShem and had Ishmael with Sarai's maidservant, HaShem made Abram send off Ishmael. That is all kinds of fucked up to Ishmael. But staying with HaShem's curse, he said Ishmael would spawn a nation that would be a thorn in Israel's side for all of time. In the Christian realm, this would greatly effect Yeshua's mission and sacrifice, as the Muslim People (as it's commonly thought that Ishmael was the father to the Islamic Peoples) can and will never stop being a thorn in Israel side, as the direct curse or promise of HaShem.
5- What is so just about a god creating Humanity for his entertainment and glorification, without their consent or input as to what their lives, deaths and afterlife be like, and then hold them accountable with no real concise method of salvation? That is not just, that is wicked. While I personally don't think the Tanakh teaches that there is an eternal hell, nor do most Jews I know or have read of, how is it fair that any of Humanity would eternally be in torment?
4- Why would the actions of two people affect the destiny of all Humanity? I am not Adam. I am not Eve. How is it just that I am born into sin?
3- If HaShem is omniscient, why did he create Lucifer? Now, some people like to use the excuse for Adam and Eve sinned because they had free-will. That's rubbish in itself, but why should Lucifer's actions effect Humanity, when he isn't a Human? It's commonly thought that the serpent in the Garden was Lucifer. So his temptation of Eve is a form of sin, therefore negatively affecting Humanity. The Garden of Eden wasn't perfect, as temptation was present, and the logic and balance of choosing yes, choosing no was heavily tilted in favor of Adam and Eve failing HaShem's test. Angels were born with their minds and bodies fully developed, therefore the thoughts and dissents that Lucifer had were placed there by HaShem himself. The story just doesn't hold water.
2- How could an ALL-loving entity create all of Humanity, but choose a favorite race? How is that all-loving? That is not only bias, but racist.
1- Because even if such a deity was real, did exist, he isn't worth believing in, and sure as shit not worthy of worship or praise.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Not to get into a discussion :)
10. According to The Believer, it wasn't a testing at all. It was showing that God is all powerful and that he can do whatever he wants. lol But seriously though, I heard once that even if God would have allowed Abraham to kill Isaac, Abraham had faith that God would have raised him from the dead. Not really sure where they got that idea though...
9. If read in the original these translational errors should be absent, right?
8. I have no idea what is wrong about knowing good from evil. But if you look at the context, all the 'shitty wars and destruction of cities' came after the knowledge of good and evil. Before they gained that knowledge they were perfect and innocent... without evil.
7. Babel did create confusion, but God's ultimate plan is not confusing. And if you were to believe in pentecost, pentecost is sometimes viewed as a reversal of Babel. A unification of the languages once again.
6. I don't know what to say. I see the same problem. lol
5. Ah, we've discussed this one before, and I like your opinion of it. But I'm not so sure that it's right. But like I've said before, if this God (HaShem) is the true God, than what He says is valid. And if what he says is valid then we must decided if we are to obey and honor him or not. One might say, "Fuck it, it's more honorable to disregard such an evil deity", or one might also say, "Shit, I've got to do something. I might as well bow to the opposition. Rebelling against God will get me nowhere." So if this is the proper characterization of God, I guess we must choose between the two. Hopefully there is a third option...
4. hmm... Let's assume two things. One, you believe in original sin and two, you believe in Christ's redemptive work on the cross. Okay, I've heard that every single individual is born with original sin. They are born with a sin nature, but even though they have that nature, their sin has been covered by Christ's work on the cross. It is only when that person consciously sins that they become unholy/worthy of condemnation etc. So therefore infant and toddler's 'sin nature' has already been covered two thousand years ago. Only when they consciously choose to disobey (upon arriving at a higher mental awareness) are they condemned. I don't know if that makes any sense or not...
3. God gives us the ability to think, but that ability allows us to think apart/against from God. Same with Lucifer, just because God allowed him to think that does not mean that his thoughts were God's thoughts. But I agree that the odds were definitely in favor of Adam and Eve failing. But what if they had never failed? What would history look like? What would our existence even be? What would be humanities point?
2. I don't believe that Jews are God's chosen people. I think for a time He used them to his purposes, but they were thrown away when they refused to see.
1. Yes, I agree, he wouldn't be worth believing in. I'm not so sure that I believe in the same God as your HaShem. :)
10. "Well, via logic- it was a test of Abraham's faith. Judaism and Islam teach this." I guess I don't understand how God's testing can prove that He is not all-loving.
9. I think that blame placed upon God for not giving us an 'accurate' translation because of the Tower of Babel is a far grasp. We still have copies in the original language. We can still read and understand the original language. And God showed them how to properly worship him. Nimrod's name means 'let us rebel'. He wasn't trying to worship God. He was exalting himself as God.
8. "HaShem cast Lucifer and his Angels out of Heaven after their battle" But they didn't have a battle. Lucifer questioned God's authority, and God kicked him and a third of the angels out. The battle doesn't occur until Armageddon. But to add my own criticism this isn't even recorded in the Genesis account. It's talked about in Ezekiel (have fun interpreting those passages) and in Revelation...
7. I believe the verse you are referring to is I Cor. 14:33. In it's context it is talking about prophesying in the church. It lays down guidelines for prophesying and also shows how certain prophesying can be unbiblical (if it creates confusion). This verse isn't explicitly talking about the character of God.
6. It's something Christians could use more of.
5. Of course. I wasn't arguing that He was all-loving. I was simply stating, that if He wasn't we'd still have to deal with it somehow. And choosing either of the two possible responses does not leave the individual any better off.
4. lol, I actually got this from a friend's prof at BBC. I was always taught the concept of the 'Age of Innocence" growing up, but it was always a 'mystery'. No one knew when an individual crossed the threshold into "The Age of Accountability". This explanation made a whole lot more sense.
3. It's an interesting point. So what if God did create evil? Then what?
2. I would agree with that! I most definitely am not a Mainstream Christian. But any reformed theologian would agree with my statement. Only dispensationalists still hold on to Israel and the Jews. Reformed theology views Israel (as spoken about by John) as the Church. A transfer occurs when Christ comes. Israel and it's covenant community as God's chosen people is transferred to the Church as a Covenant Community chosen of God. That's why I say I like reformed theology and I would most identify myself with it. Not mainstream, dispensationalist, Left-Behind, anti-intellectual, pat robertson Christianity.
1. Christianity views God differently than Judaism. Perhaps Judaism has it all wrong. Why does Christianity have to build upon the same God?
Yeah, I'll catch up eventually, well as long as truth reveals itself. That's the most important thing, you know... truth (this should totally be the next topic) AND I've had a revelation tonight: I won't be able to figure everything out within the next four or five years. It somehow just hit me that it might take a much, much longer time than that. haha.
Hopefully this dialogue won't begin to get too complicated. lol
you guys are nerds.
Post a Comment