Quote from name:private_parts
- A cruel god would place the tree of knowledge there and either: not tell them the consequences or trick them into eating it.
- A cruel god would create a bunch of lesser creatures and force them into unscrupulous situations and declare that they obey his own rules or suffer when they never deserved it in the first place
Neither case is that of the Christian God. Now unless you're talking about certain other views like that of the Westboro Baptist Church...
Your first point, I simply say - why place the tree there at all?
The tree is there so that they can make a choice. Giving people a choice is not cruelty
Your second point, I disagree. I see your situation as follows. We were created by a being so we could love and worship and obey him for eternity. When this is not done, we are punished. For many, the punishment is eternal torture. This is to me exactly the situation you prescribed a cruel God would create.
So your definition of cruelty is giving people a choice? I'd reckon God forcing his love (or even malice) upon us is cruelty.
No. Archeological and Historical findings did show us that slaves and free workers existed throughout Egypt. Historians and archeologists made it clear, however, that most of the slaves and workers were not foreigners but rather came from their own people. The problem is people like to then falsely extrapolate that the Israelite were never there in the first place. Nobody said the Israelite constituted the entirety of the slave population to ever have existed in Egyptian culture, not even the Bible said that these people built all the pyramids and structures of that time. They were for what, about a couple centuries? And think about how long the Egyptian civilization has been around. If the historians were able to properly and perfectly map out every detail of the longest recorded civilized human society in history, we wouldn't have historians or archeologists anymore. Unless we were there some millenniums ago, we may never know whether anything ever existed and not a huge collusion or lie, but anyways:
Complimentary wiki link, see the Archeology section, the other sections are good reads as well. For those wishing to whine about Wiki's veracity, click the citations and read the cited sources. Basically this is your word against overwhelming archeological evidence from experts in the field. The Israelites themselves did a massive search on it and came away empty handed, and they had every reason to find even the tiniest shred of evidence they could.
Did you even read that wiki article? It doesn't "add" to your side. I will, however, say that the historicity may not be 100% but the point isn't the historical accuracy; the point is the relationship it describes between God and the Israelites.
Here is a good overview of the slavery misconception as well:
http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/slaves.htm I don't blame you, I was falsely taught the same during high school and only recently discovered otherwise. It is a shame findings such as these take so long to circulate through society. Honestly, I suspect religious influence is to blame.
Again, did you even read that article? Funny thing is I've already given that page a good read before making my previous post. In fact, check out the first line:
For many years, it was presumed that in ancient Egypt, the Great Pyramids at Giza were built by many thousands of foreign slaves, toiling under very harsh conditions over a period of decades
Nobody said the Israelite built all the Great Pyramids at Giza.
Again, you have to read the entire articles. Neither of your links disprove anything I've said.
Also, regarding the first borns. First nobody knows for sure if every one of these people were all innocent and innocuous. Like I said it's possible they could've been brainwashed by their parents.
This is an appeal to ignorance. Starting with a fallacy as your first point does not fill me with confidence.
In addition, I only have to say that just one innocent first born was killed. Your the one that has to then try to justify that fact with an omnipotent being going on yet another killing spree.
You said innocent people were killed by God. I'm simply saying how do you know they were all innocent? But okay, say there was an
innocent person killed. Killed =/= punished, my third point already addressed this.
Second, sure the Egyptian first borns may have died but think about how many Israelite first borns the egyptians killed annually. Historians have said that the ratio of Egyptian first borns killed to a few years worth of Israelite first born deaths is about 1:40.
Can you cite this please I can find no such thing. In fact here is another wiki article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide#Ancient_Egypt saying there was no evidence of infanticide. Perhaps you are confused with the Greeks or Romans? At this point I am suspecting you just made that up. Ignorance is something I can forgive, wilful ignorance is something I abhor.
This talks about the numbers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Exodus#Numbers_and_logistics But if you are going to say "Ha! It says they found no evidence!" well that is true, just like how we cannot find evidence of a guy named billy bob who lived in 1234 BC. Just because we cannot find evidence of material things doesn't disprove it. As
this page tells us, scholars concede that the evidence or lack thereof isn't the issue, it is about plausibility.
Even killing ALL the egyptians at the time wouldn't have equaled the cumulative number of deaths the Israelites suffered - your assertion that "the Egyptians are hurting people, so we will hurt them back even harder" is invalid because God actually went pretty easy on these people.
Once again can you please cite this 'fact' which I now suspect you are pulling out of your arse.
In addition, my assertion still stands. Regardless of how many Egyptians he killed and to what ratio it was compared to Israeli deaths does not change the fact that it is the same old barbaric thinking that you come to expect from authors of that time period "they are hurting us so we will hurt them back". Eye for an eye.Do you even know what an eye for an eye is? See the wiki definition:
The meaning of the principle, an eye for an eye is that a person who has injured another person returns the offending action to the originator in compensation.
It DOES matter how many people were "hurt back." Go back to the article, it's clear that the "damage" done by God is nothing compared to what has been done to the Israelites over the years. Also, realize that it wasn't just simply "Oh, the egyptians are hurting the israelites, so now God will hurt them back!" Ever heard of the phrase "Let my people go?" Moses told Pharaoh many times to do this but he refused. This is hardly barbaric at all.
Third and more importantly, when innocents die, they aren't being punished at all, thus god wouldn't be sending these people to hell. There's this whole issue of the "age of understanding" theologians talk about everyday.
This is basically going back to what I have said in my previous post. If you are accepting that God is omnipotent as step 1 then every single action no matter how tremendous you will have to justify. Your third point shows this to the letter, you have basically conceded that God can kill anyone he wants for any reason and we would not be able to condemn him for it, have you not?
If you start with the question "IS God omnipotent?" and then look at his actions, which is what I have done, you will of course come to the obvious conclusion. He most certainly is not.And... I already justified his actions regarding this whole Egyptian/firstborns/etc issue - he gave a CLEAR warning to Pharaoh to stop doing what he is doing or there will be consequences - such are the actions of a JUST and FAIR God. If you want to say "well why didn't he find a 'peaceful' way out of that situation?" Frankly, we're not God, we probably will never know, but what we do know is that simply snapping his fingers and making all disappear immediately is essentially taking away our ability to choose, which is something I already addressed. Just because he doesn't do something automatically means he's incapable of doing it.
You have also failed to mention perhaps my biggest gripe I have with the whole firstborn slaughter thing. Why is it moral for God to transfer the punishment for one person's sins to other people? If my father murders someone, I do not go to jail. Yet when the Pharoah sins, others pay for it.No i made this point very clear: First borns dying in this context is NOT punishment upon those first borns - punishment is dying and then being sent to hell. If you want to know what this whole "age of understanding" is, do let me know. The parents/families/Egyptians aren't as innocent as you think they are. Even your wiki links prove this too. Also, Pharaoh didn't go unpunished, in the 10th and final plague Pharaoh's first born did die. Have you see the animated Disney movie "Prince of Egypt?" It details everything clearly.
It is the same with Jesus, every single person, no matter how their sins, can earn forgiveness through redemption in Christ. Their sins can just slip away. Scapegoating! Transferring your own moral responsibility onto another. This is a cowardly, monstrous action that I despise. When a man rapes and murders a woman that evil will
always taint him. He will always be a murderer. Always be a rapist. Yet your God says no, forget about all that, Jesus will take all that on to himself. That is what Heaven is full of, scapegoats. People who have thrown their moral responsibility onto another. Frankly, I would despise such company.So you do not believe in second chances? Basically you are saying that a person who has failed a test should never ever be able to advance in school. You are also saying that if someone who did something bad has a change of heart (or rehabilitated), he should instead forever be sullied by the public and never have a chance to get his one and only life (something you people love talking about) back on the right track. Your train of thought is what's monstrous. Have you seen the MSNBC show "Locked Up"? Many of those criminals are sadists, could care less about what happens to them, and don't give a shit if what they did was right or wrong. These people would be applicable in your case.
Also, Christianity isn't just simply, "I believe Jesus died for my sins!" and bam you're saved. If you truly believe in Jesus, your
heart will compel you to prove this by living according to his teachings. If you truly believe in Jesus, one way to prove this would be by never murdering and raping a woman.
You have yet to show me an example of where God murders innocent people for no reason at all. Please show me examples in the Bible and I'll tell you why God did what he did.
Well as I have just said this is a rather meaningless task if you concede in your third point that God can murder innocents for whatever reason he wants. And I'm not saying God kills for no reason, I'm saying God kills for stupid and bad reasons. Especially when he doesn't have to kill at all there are so much more peaceful ways for an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God to remove someone. Here is one of my favourites I like quoting:
2 Kings 2:23-24From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. %u201CGet out of here, baldy!%u201D they said. %u201CGet out of here, baldy!%u201D He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the LORD. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys. I said God
murdering innocents. First of all, know the difference between murder and killing. Second, have you read 2 Kings or do you even know the whole story of Elisha? Those boys are not innocent people who just happened to stumble upon Elijah and make fun of his hair do or w/e.
Here's another good list for you to go ahead and justify:
http://lukeprog.com/religion/evil_bible_stories.htmlGive me your top 3 or 4, I don't have time to address all of them.
You asked or raised issues regarding what's in the Bible so why would you refuse biblical quotes which corroborate what I'm telling you? If you hold such a bitter sentiment towards what the Bible says, fine, but if you are only going to continue posting here with a closed and bigoted mindset and only argue for the sake of venting out your hatred, then you need to stop wasting your time and move on.
Yes that was a nice little rant there but hardly becoming on a forum such as this. Refrain from throwing around such accusations in the future...
Now I do not hold a 'bitter sentiment' towards the Bible, I merely believe the majority of its contents to be inaccurate and not useful to today's society. Even treating it as a work of fiction I can find little enjoyment from it.
I will expand upon what I said, quoting Bible passages mean nothing to me. I want to hear what is actually your own words, just throwing some random line out from the Bible and leaving it hanging there as if it actually represents a coherent argument is laughable. I'm asking why God is it moral for God to punish us with something for which we have no control. Every human is born with sin already burdened on their shoulders. It is impossible for a human to live free of sin as they are born with it due to ancestral/original sin. We are created by God caged, and then Jesus is the key dangled in front of us. Now, in your own words, why is it moral for God to do this. Why must we be born imprisoned and already condemned to the flames.It's only immoral if God damns us to eternal punishment WITHOUT offering any other options. So then your next question is "well, why are we punished for what Adam did?" I would absolutely love to write my answer out but to save time, I will point you to
this article. Don't worry, this person isn't just throwing bible versus out there with no explanation. He gives an analysis on this whole issue. And there are also articles like
this too. My views can pretty much be summed up by theirs.
I already told you, "beaming" his message of loving into everyone's brains is NOT giving people the choice to love and develop relationships. Thus my point still stands.
Ugh, wow. That is all you have to say? Beaming the message people still have the choice to follow that message or not.
Aaand I'm still asking the same question from my previous post. Why was his method of forgiveness a
human sacrifice. A human sacrifice!!! Not anyone of you here today witnessing that same event would just sit and watch a god damn human sacrifice. That is barbarity and stupidity of the enth degree, yet stopping such an act would have been an affront to your God. Okay I admit I didn't fully read your response. You ask why did he use a human sacrifice? Because that's what justice is. Do you really think that all the evil that has ever occurred in all of history could simply be "dismissed" without any justice? You say "well he's omnipotent, he can create an exception here." He most definitely could, but that's not the kind of God he is (I've already addressed this previously). He is a just God, and he provided the balance of justice by offering His Son in LIEU of punishing everyone on Earth, which is really what we deserve. And only a perfect sacrifice would do, so not just ANYBODY could be sacrificed, because we are all sinners. There has only been one perfect, sinless person in all of history and that was Jesus Christ. That is why only He would suffice to pay for all the sins of the world for all time. Justice has been paid. Remember, Jesus' disciples tried their very best to keep Jesus away from the Romans but Jesus said that this is something he wants to do. Willingness to sacrifice yourself is not barbaric, it is love. If you want to say "well why didn't he just snap his fingers and have it all be done," then you need to go back and reread what I've said previously.
And WHY is it conditional, if to forgive people, why not forgive them, unconditionally? Is he really so petty and spiteful that he will condemn millions to eternal torture for not thinking he exists? ... and we go back to what I said way back:
"But wait, why didn't he just simply say 'you are all forgiven' and be done like that?"
Because he wants us to choose to love him, to have a relationship with him. Otherwise, we'd be like robots who do everything as he commands. That's not love, love is a choice. And do not get "just" and "malevolence" mixed up. He is a just God in that he makes it clear what the ramifications are if we choose not to accept him. "Wait so God is blackmailing us into having to believe in him!" No, he just asks us to do something so simple. I could go on, but I highly doubt you'll read or care any further.
Just like how laughable I find your views on Christianity/religion. I've seen better and less myopic arguments/views from Christians and apologists. In fact, even the other Atheists here on this site and other communities I'm a part of offer more thought provoking and mature arguments than anything you have said here. I suggest you learn from those people first.
Yes nice bit of ad hominem here in an attempt to shore up your wet-tissue argument. I guess I can say the same, you are basically doing what the majority of other internet-Christians I have discussed with are doing.
Never let yourself be diverted by what you wish to be true. Put that aside and look only at the facts.I don't care what you think about me, but at least I don't say stuff like this:
Thank fuck there is no evidence for his existence. And shame on all you fools who actually believe such a monstrous thing be true. it is just so laughably obvious that the story is wrong.Don't think you can spout such nonsense without scrutiny. If such statements aren't going to contribute to your argument or discussion, keep it to yourself.
Fire_Kame
)) and I've even researched Jesus as real or not. There were several historians in and around the time of Jesus most not even acknowledging him and the ones that do are so short its most likely a false document. Assuming the document is real then why would the son of god's documentation be so belittling. 
. And more ridiculous stories won't prove anything. But I do like the part where Elijah summons two bears to maul 42 children for making fun of his bald head. What a great way to get people to listen to what you have to say: kill their children.